I have definitely noticed that I will eat more or less depending on the size of the plate. Maybe it only applies to people who were taught to clean their plate, dunno.
For me it would probably depend on if I dished myself. Also at a restaurant taking food to go is pretty normalized. Vs. At a dinner party you might feel like you should just eat the whole dish.
Isn't it dramatic irony when we, the audience, know that the first sentence is counterproductive to the point being made by the author while the author isn't aware? Maybe it depends on how meta you want to be about considering the author of the article a character.
When I think of fancy restaurants I always see huge plates with a dash of food smeared somewhere. Very easy to finish it all. Now you could say they compensate by offering a 12-course menu but that's not about plate sizes anymore.
An anecdote: someone close to me had written some of the diplomatic cables Snowden leaked. After the leak they (and others) received stern warnings to not access stories about the leaks on their unclassified systems, because those systems were not authorized to access the classified information (in the New York Times).
This is increasingly common in domestic US full-price airlines. It makes sense, in a way - most folks have their own devices, and the airlines save money and weight and don't have to worry about future tech obsolescence - but still makes me a bit sad.
Right? That's why I don't want a car with any system for entertainment, beyond generics like speakers. The car is ideally going to last 25+ years, by which time that shit will be obsolete. The software won't be upgradable, etc.
Same. I most recently flew Frontier and despite looking really spartan, it was actually super comfortable. And no reclining to fret over the whole flight.
Indeed - I don't generally fly on US low cost carriers, but regularly used to fly on EasyJet in Europe, and the non-reclining seats were just more pleasant for everyone.
I appreciate the nod to whole milk, which has been repeatedly shown to be associated with _lower_ obesity in children. E.g. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31851302/, many other studies.
This is for children and adolescents, which have different needs than the average adult. It's also just a meta analysis of literature with zero RCTs and a suggestive correlation. Unfortunately, these new guidelines don't seem even nearly detailed enough to cover these kinds of differences. The usual guidelines are well over 150 pages.
This is a meta-analysis of 28 studies. "Of 5862 reports identified by the search, 28 met the inclusion criteria: 20 were cross-sectional and 8 were prospective cohort."
One of the best books I read this year. I think a lot of HN readers will like it. A really balanced take on China that also digs deep into the perennial question of “why can’t we build big infrastructure projects in the US?” that comes up here quite often.
Well of course, and the book digs a little into the history as well, and what changed around the 1960s/70s. There is a long section on Robert Moses, for example. He draws a lot of parallels between modern China and the US in the 19th and early 20th centuries - totally different political systems, but similar “breakneck” ability to build.
It also defies easy summaries, but my biggest takeaways were that 1) the CCP really doesn't care about the costs any of its policies (one-child, zero COVID, etc) impose on its citizenry, and 2) that the CCP is actively preparing China for a world where it's entirely cut off from the West, because it realizes that's the price to pay for invading Taiwan.
I'd agree that China is preparing to be cut off, but it's not because of Taiwan. Dan specifically mentions this:
"In vain do I protest that there are historical and geopolitical reasons motivating the desire, that chip fabs cannot be violently seized, and anyway that Beijing has coveted Taiwan for approximately seven decades before people were talking about AI."
Consider the historical timeline: "Fortress China" policies coincide with the rise of American protectionism on both sides of the aisle and the introduction of chip restrictions and punishing tariffs. Taiwan is an emotional/nationalist issue for China, but it's only one part of their policy, not the lynchpin as your comment suggests.
+1 biggest takeaway from me was that China / Asian societies emphasize process knowledge, which does not seem to be the case for U.S. tech in my working experience.
The author’s ideological bent against Big Tech shows through most clearly in the passage on Uber:
> Uber replaced taxis by having people drive others in their own car. But what was created as "ride-sharing" was in fact a way to 1) destroy competition and 2) make a shittier service while people producing the work were paid less and lost labour rights
There are valid complaints about Uber, but most people consider it a materially better service than taxis most of the time. They vote that way with their wallets, long after VC subsidies ended, and often even when it costs _more_ than a taxi.
reply