There are some shenanigans in this paper so far, like using regional statistics (conservative places) to generalize about very particular sociopolitical cleavages (conservative ideology) and failure to control for, or even acknowledge, more obvious independent variables such as local economy, infrastructure, and socioeconomics.
I resolved it by installing an air purifier in the bedroom where she vapes. But agreed, her vape isn’t invisible (though I think some e-liquids are) and OP didn’t mention so it’s low probability in this case.
Does anyone in your house vape?
Corps gonna corp, but I’ve tested this with all the systems and network analysis tools at my disposal, and the on-device and e2e guarantees appear to hold, for now.
But people are right to be suspicious, because it’s rare. The engineering challenges of mobile inference compared to data center hardware, the expense of developing models without free data from users, and the lack of future data brokerage side-hustle options are why it’s rare. So anyone who can should audit these claims periodically, particularly with respect to data collection.
Don’t set yourself on fire just to keep others warm.
I’ve heard this truism my whole life, and glibly repeated it myself at least a few times. But we must acknowledge that it expresses a morally defeatist attitude that poisons the person who actually lives by it.
Instead you can reconcile kindness by being more observant. Some “good deeds” aren’t actually that good, since their extended effects amount to an unkindness to yourself or those you love.
For example, let’s say someone asks you to donate to a just cause, or loan them some money in a difficult time. If doing so means your family goes hungry or can’t afford clothes, it might not be such a good deed after all.
More subtle examples involve your time, such as helping someone by staying late at work, or spending hours listening to someone who really should get professional help instead.
Ultimately, it’s not true that “no good deed goes unpunished,” but even if it were, it doesn’t matter, because helping people is its own reward.
Don’t avoid being good to others, as this truism suggests, just ensure you’re being good to yourself as well.
If you are a disregarded entity, are not currently and do not in the next 6 or 12 months expect to make enough profit for an AGI above a certain percentage of the FPL, and your state has Medicaid, you can apply for Medicaid with dependents using recent profit and loss reports to substantiate your effective self-employment income.
Go camping together. Nothing fancy, just a weekend at a park with a small tent and backpacks.
Let your team know you’ll be unreachable. Once there, phones off. No working. Just walk and talk, rest and eat, explore your surroundings, focus on what and who is in front of you.
You may not sleep well on night 1, but you will on night 2, especially if you covered some ground that day. The morning after night 3, however, will be the most well-rested you’ve felt in a some time. The effect carries to subsequent nights, then eventually wears off, but can give you the chance to restructure your days for better sleep in the long term. Use as needed.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Maybe imperative “chill, dude”
Honestly, the *best* thing to do would be to reset everything to the REAL tradition of the Olympics. Almost nothing, other than running, jumping, and fighting. With an absolute minimum of rules to get in the way, and all the athletes competing in the nude. Just sandals on their feet.
OK I’m listening
Hell yes, rocket propelled cocainades
Cocaine
Lift and bonk later?
deleted by creator
The primary weakness of this paper is its complete reliance on two extremely small and poorly-designed studies. The first was performed on Reddit with n = 194 Redditors who self-reported how healthy they were on a 9 point scale, how liberal/conservative they felt on a 9 point scale, and answered a series of questions to establish a personal responsibility score (PRS). The second was performed with n = 204 local students, mostly teenagers, recruited based on political party affiliation, whose healthiness was established only by how often they claimed to take the stairs.
You should be able to identify at least 6 major design flaws in the studies above, but in short the researcher not only failed to prevent but seemingly employed predictable biases, especially in regards to his measures of health, which were entirely self-reported. It should go without saying but: just because some group of people tend to consider themselves better than others in some respect does not actually make it so, yet that is precisely what this paper says.
As to contrary evidence: you typically won’t find a paper published in any serious journal whose thesis is so close to “ideology A is better.” Eschewing scholarly impartiality on politically charged topics is generally frowned upon. Doing so in exchange for publishing and/or favor with wealthy patrons has always been possible, and while increasingly prevalent in recent years, it is primarily the realm of conservative academics if only because it causes a greater stir (shares, citations, impact factor). Even using the loaded phrase “personal responsibility” in a political context, and equating it to the term used in health literature, marks this as a rather obvious insider piece not subject to the typical quality controls. So, it’s unlikely you will easily find an equivalently obnoxious antithesis like “conservatives are less fit,” “liberals have better dental hygiene,” or what have you. But does that mean conservatives are healthier?
No. We can confirm this a variety of ways, since exposure to any social science will routinely surround you with high quality evidence to the contrary, but here is where I would start: