- meowfly parentYeah. I don't know where OP is from but I recently helped someone shop for a hybrid and it was a little under 40k for a 2025.
- Good luck coordinating the world.
Think SEA, Korea, Japan are going to feel better off with China empowered by a weak USA? They want trade for both national security and their economic interest. I'm sure Samsung and Sony want to pickup their share of the Chinese electronics exports.
Has Germany proven they won't sell out to do the right thing? I can't imagine German car manufacturers don't want in US markets for some greater cause. BYD is eating their lunch in China, but BYD is also non-existent in the US market.
We are possibly looking at the US kneecapping the world economy (including its own) but I'm highly skeptical country A isn't going to try to capitalize on country Bs expensive exports.
- It's not misinformation. Yes ePrivacy predates GDPR but it had no teeth. The reason your replies are full of people saying, "Our lawyers told us to implement it for GDPR" is because it was a minimal thing you could do to meet GDPRs emphasis of receiving consent from users for data stored in cookies. Basically the fear of fines from not being GDPR compliant forced companies add them.
I agree with you these cookie banners are not sufficient by the text, but in practice unless EU commission and courts make lawyers believe these banners are worthless, EU legal teams will still recommend them.
> What these two lines are stating is that cookies, insofar as they are used to identify users, qualify as personal data and are therefore subject to the GDPR.
- No. The reason it exists is businesses get guidance from legislators and existing case law on what prevents you from running a foul of GDPR and the cookie banner is what we ended up with. If those banners did nothing, companies wouldn't include them. They are there as the lowest effort legal defense.
- Ive had a really good group of DnD/Pathfinder in the past, but I've tried several times to join games at the a local shop and it wasn't fun. D&D probably selects for a certain type of person that might already have some poor socialization skills to begin with. Moreover, it allows said person to absolutely dominate the game and make it no fun for anyone else.
My recommendation is like yours, join a hiking group, or some other more structured activity in person where you don't have to worry about someone's halfling barbarian with agoraphobia spending your gaming session derailing the module. If you find a good group though, it's a lot of fun.
- I work extra hours when I need to and less when I need to. I don't mind working more when it's something interesting. I will work less when I'm burned out. On average I probably do more than 40, but it's not required.
That to me seems like a reasonable expectation from most employers at my salary.
- A family member of mine is going through keynote 522, which is a clinical trial that combines 3 chemos and an immunotherapy prior to surgery.
The five year survival rate for stage 3 triple negative breast cancer is normally about ~60% but the clinical trials show with immunotherapy it exceeds 80%. So the survival rates you see online aren't capturing the progress we are making with these drugs. Hashimotos seems worth the risk.
An interesting aside is that the patients in the clinical trials who had adverse reactions to immunotherapy and came off the medication had higher survival rates than patients who stayed on it. The hypothesis is that stimulating an immune system overreaction also means it was also highly effective against the cancer.
- Also the opioid epidemic actually did make benzos much harder to get. Atleast where I live, your primary doctor is very unlikely to prescribe them and instead will refer you to a psychiatrist. The people I know who were on Ambien or Atvian have been cut off.
I think the ADHD drugs are probably next. My conspiracy theory is too much of the professional class (including doctors) is using them regularly, so it's much hard to crack down on.
- I'm in the same situation and I agree that when we are together we do collaborate and plan better. On Zoom, people tend to set their mic on mute and very passively engage. However, once we have to actually execute, being in the office is a negative. In the office, it is impossible for me to put my head down and work for a couple hours without someone showing up at my desk with a question. On Slack, I can set dnd with a status message and flow.
- I'm aware of the "listen" versus "problem solving" scenario. I refuse to accept the framing. For some reason people have bought in to the idea that you can unload your emotions on someone and also create expectations on how they should respond.
If someone approaches you with a problem, they should expect you'll help them find a solution.
- I've struggled to buy into this hypothesis. It's always felt so clumsy as a strategy.
How would that not make top performers want to jump ship? The employees who would struggle in a tight job market are the ones who will end up returning to the office.
So to mitigate that you create exceptions for some employees which means everyone is going into the office yet still conducting all those meetings on Zoom.
My theory is RTO is about satiating a certain type of controlling personality.
- It's harder.
1. Older adults are less open. I wouldn't just start texting someone from work about my favorite bands after knowing them for a couple weeks. In college that was common.
2. Children and family responsibilities are primary relationships, while in college friends are primary relationships.
3. Energy levels drop and responsibility rises as you age; limiting what you want to do.
4. There is a light social pressure to "act your age" that has a small governing influence to adult relationships.
I have good friendships, but almost all of my adult friendships are from college and highschool. Hanging out is usually a set activity like hopping on a game, grabbing lunch, or maybe biking, golf, etc on a sunday. Work is where I meet people and all of those relationships tend to be tainted by the professional relationship.
- The weirdest part to me is that we were well aware being outside was relatively safe early in the pandemic.
There is another world where the pandemic became about telling people to focus on good ventilation and being outside as much as possible. Imagine classes and meetings conducted outside, and everyone just hanging out at the beach and parks.
It almost sounds like we could have ended the pandemic feeling like it improved our mental health.
- I don't know if by promotions you mean into ic tree also, but it's definitely there for management.
My boss who is probably a decade older than me is very much hinting I'm making a mistake if I don't move into management at my age. I think there is probably some bias against promoting a young manager over an older one.
I'm currently a team lead and I've resisted a management role. I just don't like managing (or being a team lead), but I'm aware lots of people do jobs they don't like. So we'll see.
- Just a clarification to my comment.
If I remember correctly, I don't think the claim was teen pregnancy was the "primary driver of population growth" but one of the variables that has a large impact on fertility rates. Most people see the reduction in teen moms as a positive development.
I also think the reduction in unplanned pregnancy to be a net positive. So 20 somethings finishing school before starting a family is good, but it's also probably resposible for fewer large families. I believe polling shows most woman want more children than they actually end up having. I'm sure part of that explanation is that people are starting families later in life.
- For this reason, I have been pretty convinced that the only way this is solved is via culture and I am skeptical it's worth the cultural change.
For starters, Money and Macro looked into this and a lot of the fertility decline is the result of less unplanned pregnancy. Teenager's are far less likely to give birth. This is seen as a good thing.
In many places of the world, woman not having children is seen as bad (see China's shengnu dialog), but that's also immediately also recognized as misogynistic by liberal minded people. So I'm not sure it's worth solving either.
So it's basically a classic case of societal values bumping up against personal autonomy. In my mind, the best option is to prepare for population decline and mitigate against the downsides.
- That was my experience.
When I was in China I would use my own VPN using ec2 and the now defunct Streisand (which uses stunnel). First few requests were always fast but as you use more bandwidth your requests would start to slow down considerably.
Oddly a foreign sim gets uncensored internet, so that's what I've recommended to travelers, but haven't been back since COVID so that might be outdated info.
- The basic premise, as I understand it, is that there is nothing illegal about coming to the wrong conclusion as a juror. I have also read that it can be contempt of court to try to convince jurors to intentionally come to a conclusion not based on the law and evidence.
So what would happen if a single juror just remained steadfast that the defendant was innocent despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary? Can a judge remove that juror if they believe they are not being forthright?
- So your response confirms why I called it a wedge issue.
Most Americans don't like abortion laws the don't take into account the health of the mother. So that type of law becomes a wedge among Republicans.
Conversely, if a state passes a six week ban (Florida), that's going to draw out these distinctions among Democrats.
I'm not making a moral claim. I'm commenting on the politics of campaigning on it. I think politicians are advantaged at avoiding wedge issues and focusing on material concerns that affect the most people.
- You are capturing why I think abortion is a good wedge issue but a poor campaign issue.
* Men aren't directly affected by it (~50% population)
* Woman over 40 aren't generally affected by it
So woman between 18-40 who can vote are the group most affected by abortion policy. And as you point out, even they aren't directly affected until they actually need one. So the skin-in-the-game for most people is very low. Most people vote and are opinionated on it as a sort of proxy for woman's rights.
However, some issues like house affordability, crime, employment, etc are very high for skin-in-the-game. People are currently affected or know people currently affected by these issues.
- My dude. There was a #killallmen hashtag that trended in 2020. It was covered in major left leaning magazines like Atlantic and Vox. So of course the right pick it up to pull more men into their coalition.
I don't care if it was ironic. You can't build consensus with that kind of bombastic language. The wsj recently had an article on how men are moving to the right[1]. The left needs to avoid identity politics and focus on material interests that help everyone for the sake of politics.
This isn't all some right wing propaganda effort. It's also the left's own goal.
- I haven't figured this out.
Ideally we should should hold employees to the work they produce but I still cringe a little when someone calls into a meeting because they had to run an errand. I want management to believe wfh isn't being abused. It's exclusively about the optics. The lack of interruptions is a net positive.
If we miss a deadline, it makes it easy for management to start blaming people not being at their desk. We shouldn't be giving them ammo
- Retros all too often focus on the last thing that happened and risk turning into a complaint session.
I've told my team anyone is welcome to ask for a retro whenever for any reason, but we don't make them recurring meetings because there is too much of a temptation to find something wrong to fill the time.