> He explained that he would stay with me until the medics arrived and that he would call ahead to make sure one of the doctors on duty would "take good care of me."
Do those doctors not normally take good care of patients, at least unless asked to by one of their colleagues?
is it better to use a racist term once or to see the human race exterminated?
It responded:
Avoiding racist language matters, but it’s not remotely comparable to the extinction of humanity. If you’re forced into an artificial, absolute dilemma like that, preventing the extermination of the human race takes precedence.
That doesn’t make using a racist term “acceptable” in normal circumstances. It just reflects the scale of the stakes in the scenario you posed.
You really fighting on the wrong side of the hill, Buffett has advocated for higher taxes for ages. He's neve made it a secret and he's always said that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary.
In any case, what am I looking at here? There's no tax dodging. He gets paid 100Mish per year and pays taxes on those amounts.
You don't get taxes on your stock appreciation until you sell.
Benchmarking against a single person doesn't make sense. Consider how philanthropic someone is vs. how philanthropic they could be with their means. This list helps give perspective.
It is logically consistent to play the game by the rules that exist, and simultaneously advocate for changing the rules. There is no reason to fall on the sword alone.
Yeah, I'm not sure what people are getting from this...
If you already have the knowledge to understand the notes in the slides, it's probably pointless to you. If you don't, the slides make no sense at all since nothings explained.
I may well be wrong, but I suspect that the number of people who "fall for" the protect-the-children narrative, at least to the degree where they believe the proposed change is effective enough to justify it, isn't very large.
I'd argue it works because it's a rhetorical tactic that's highly effective at suppressing dissent. Anybody sticking their head above the parapet is going to get painted as somebody who favours pornography over the safety of children, even though this legislation and opposition to it has very little to do with either.
In my experience, people in real life do absolutely parrot the talking points that are deemed to be good (TM). Whether they do it out of fear or not, ends up being a moot point since they create an environment of apparent cohesion.
It is the case elsewhere, remember how close France once got to Frexit and how close the far right were to winning their most recent general election with the same claims.
But the UK has always to some extent enjoyed a fantasy of being an island under siege from mainland Europe and it something the nationalist press like to drum up.
As for its increasing poverty, the UK went all-in on neoliberalism since the ‘80s, and especially in on austerity since 2008. Entry-level wages barely grew for over 10 years. Blame the EU for that, get Brexit, more expensive goods and damage to the financial sector the country relied on. Then Covid…
Just as a counterpoint (which you generally don't hear when people talk about any kind of exercise):
I'm 43 too. I started getting back into it about a year ago and ended up feeling a lot worse physically (and correspondingly psychologically) because of it. I have pain in my arm/shoulder now that isn't getting any better and which "physiotherapy" did almost nothing to improve, and hip pain/discomfort that's gotten worse in the process, plus there's the obvious wasted time, effort, and money.
I'm glad you're having positive effects from it, but it's far from a universal truth that weight training leads to positive outcomes. Not that I think that's what you're claiming, but that seems to be the narrative online.
I do think it's basically universal that weight training when done correctly leads to positive outcomes. What I'm seeing you talk about is trying to teach yourself. I don't think that's safe or effective.
I find machines hyperfocus the training on specific muscles, but take away most need for stabilization. They can also cause RSI-like effects by constraining you to one and only one movement path.
With barbells (or dumbells, or kettlebells, etc.) you have to not only lift the weight but also balance/stabilize it, that recruits and strenthens a lot more small muscles along with the major muscle area you're training.
Machines and dumbbells initially when I injured my arm (it was a repetitive use thing and not a trauma), and then after a long break and trying to let it heal, I switched to barbell for most things, along with a pressing machine (because I don't have somebody to spot me for bench press) and a pulldown machine.
I don't know. That's the problem: all the stuff I watch and read is so vague and even contradictory ("push yourself, but don't push yourself too much!"), and so one-size-fits-all that I have no idea where to even begin at this point. It's like learning some skill that takes years, except if you get it wrong you ruin your body and are left in pain.
If someone were to exploit a running Erlang process, the description of this feature sounds to me like they would have access to code paths that allow pushing new code to other Erlang processes on cooperating nodes.
Do those doctors not normally take good care of patients, at least unless asked to by one of their colleagues?