13 ms·

Pothead Ph.D. - This is most definitely not a cautionary tale

66 points by robg 18y ago

josefresco 18y ago
Wow, an entire article about the benefits of pot and working and no mention from this "Ph.D" about the difference between Indica and Sativa marijuana. For those too lazy to Google it, Sativa (usually grown outdoors) is great for working (think euphoria, and optimism), Indica (usually indoor) is for relaxing at the end of the day and "zoning out". Think 'body high' Those FUD commercials you see with the kids deflated on the couch? Indica. The commercials you don't see? Well those would be showing motivated Ph.D students working their ass off after smoking a little Sativa (apparently unaware of the chemistry behind the scenes if this article is any judge). Lesson for kids: Do your homework (this applies to your hobbies too) If you think just smoking weed will help your studies, at least make sure you're buying the right kind or a hybrid which will give you a little of both.
- robg 18y ago
  Every state doesn't have distribution "clubs" where all the varieties are laid out in front of you before purchase and with a sampler or two.
  - josefresco 18y ago
    Right, which means you need to be aware of what you're buying from your dealer and how it effects you. Buying a big ol bag of Indica, sitting down and taking a few bong rips will NOT help you finish the writing essay or give you the inspiration to code your next application masterpiece. Most likely you'll find yourself sitting on the couch watching some crappy MTV reality show too lazy to get up and fetch the remote. My point: All weed is not created equal, ask your dealer for the kind you want (and if necessary educate him/her)
    - kaos 18y ago
      || buy the specific seeds you want, and grow them yourself in your closet!
      - josefresco 18y ago
        You can't grow a 10 foot Sativa plant in our closet. You're better off with a hybrid that's mostly Indica (smaller bushy plants). Which if you're looking for some motivation won't help you a great deal (will help your PS3 high scores though)
        kaos 18y ago
        You're right, for pure sativas you would need a big closet. Maybe with a 75% s - 25% i, you can get close enough. (PS: i don't like to mix tech with thc).
- omouse 18y ago
  "Lesson for kids: Do your homework (this applies to your hobbies too)" Isn't it amazing the kinds of things people will do without the slightest bit of research?
- jey 18y ago
  This seems to be accurate, but I've never been able to find any scientific explanation for the difference in effect. I've heard it attributed to the different ratios of THC to CBD, but I can't find any articles/papers to confirm this.
  - rms 18y ago
    There are also a number of analogs of THC present such as THC-V which is 500 times stronger than THC. http://designer-drugs.com/pte/12.162.180.114/dcd/chemistry/thc/index.html http://designer-drugs.com/pte/12.162.180.114/dcd/chemistry/t...
    - rms 18y ago
      and for anyone with a chemistry background reading the above, be warned that ordering olivetol is a quick way to get a DEA agent to show up at your door
      - aswanson 18y ago
        Damn it, I want my Kratom.
        rms 18y ago
        the 7-hydroxymitragynine precursors are ok but I don't have the capital to set up an industrial synthesis... for any intrigued chemical engineers there is a lot of money to be made here.
        LPTS 18y ago
        Here is the thing. For anyone who's good enough at setting up chemistry equipment to be good enough for you, why wouldn't they rather make a few batches of MDMA or LSD instead. Shit, Shulgin has 3 whole books, which, in addition to being keys from an extraterrestrial into the ways our brain works and we experience ourselves, are also recipes for unique psychedelics. I could imagine people could make a lot more money then doing your legal shit a lot faster by making those analogues and distributing them at high price to the real heads that hang out at places like Alex Grey art shows or consciousness or AI conferences. You'd make a lot of money by knowing a few interesting people and supplying their scientific and artistic circles with these analogues. You could write a very interesting thesis on the results. And, you'd be advancing science a great deal. In theory of course. We would never expect authentic scientists and hackers to break the boundaries the authority system have prescribed for them. A good scientist will always obey the authorities, and only look in the allowed places for knowledge about how the world works. Any new lens with which we might perceive reality will be brushed under the rug. In fact, we will always bow down to power and aggressively attack anyone who conflicts with the normal way of looking at the world, just like the original scientists did (huh?). These laws and boundaries are essential to conventional power structures. It's scandalous and completely unhackerlike how close you come to violating these systems of control. My idea was completely hypothetical. You disgust me hippy. :)
- Andys 18y ago
  I've been surfing the 'net and reading the occasional pot-related article for years and this is the first time I've heard of that.
Alex3917 18y ago
"For that matter, it ain't alcohol, which is far worse for one's body and mind." Except for that not only is moderate consumption of alcohol good for you, but teetotalism is as bad for your health as being morbidly obese. How is it possible for someone to get a Ph.D. without picking up even a trace of scientific literacy?
- ckuehne 18y ago
  "How is it possible for someone to get a Ph.D. without picking up even a trace of scientific literacy?" One word: humanities.
- josefresco 18y ago
  What about for alcoholics? If refraining from something completely is bad, should we all experience LSD/Cocaine/Heroine infrequently? I would think the real damage of teetotalism would be the stress involved in constantly thinking about and addressing it. Not so much the lack of the substance in the body.
  - Alex3917 18y ago
    "I would think the real damage of teetotalism would be the stress involved in constantly thinking about and addressing it." Then you would be wrong: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EED9143FF932A05751C1A9649C8B63 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EED9143FF...
    - josefresco 18y ago
      The large population studies this article cites aren't exactly convincing. Anyone can perform similar studies showing other correlations. The "feeding studies" are more important to scientific understanding. Also, I would think an individuals personal health profile would outweigh blanket advice like "drink moderately".
    - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
      This article shows benefits from moderate drinking for individuals at high risk of heart disease, not the population at large: For many people moderate drinking has absolutely no benefit at all, Dr. Klatsky said. This applies to all adolescents: teenagers have a negligible risk of heart disease and for them the risks of heavy drinking vastly outweigh any benefits of moderate drinking. The same generally applies to men under 40 and women under 50, except for those with known heart disease risks. Pregnant women, people with liver disease, known drinking problems or a family history of alcoholism should never be advised to begin to drink for their health, he said. But for others with known coronary heart disease or a risk of heart disease because of obesity, cholesterol levels, or smoking, moderate alcohol use may be a way to reduce that risk. It is important to look at context when reading about these sorts of studies.
petercooper 18y ago
Before anyone starts taking this guy seriously, consider the impact that drug use could have on your life in terms of the social effects rather than the drug itself. Being arrested for possession (or, worse, dealing) could invalidate you from easy worldwide travel (merely having been arrested - let alone charged - invalidates you from many visa waiver programs), numerous professions, and delay certain opportunities. You have to seriously consider whether you can get away with it, and, if you don't, whether you can handle the consequences. I'm not pro or anti drugs, but I'm very much anti people ruining their future for the sake of some temporary fun. But if you know you can deal with it, enjoy it!
- yummyfajitas 18y ago
  It's not particularly difficult for a white/asian middle class person (most people here, I'm guessing) to avoid getting busted. It's not like the cops are out to get you. Just don't take pot onto the subway or speed while it's in your car, and you should be fine.
- cmos 18y ago
  In the US the consequences will vary depending on what state you live in. In upstate NY, sitting in traffic court for an evening I learned that every single case for 'possession' (all small amounts - not 'intent to distribute') was given a $50 fine and nothing on their record. What would the 20's have been if everyone was too scared to go to a speakeasy?
  - Alex3917 18y ago
    The actual NY state law as explained by NORML: "Possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana is punishable by a fine of $100 for the first offense." 25g is .88 ounces, which is what a recreational smoker might consume in an entire year. It's worth noting though that the punishments are much harsher if you get caught smoking or displaying weed in public.
    - anamax 18y ago
      > 25g is .88 ounces, which is what a recreational smoker might consume in an entire year. Then all of the smokers that I knew were professionals.
edw519 18y ago
Oh you poor baby! You have trouble reading and writing and 'rithmetic, so you need a little chemical help. You pussy. Get out of cocoon, er I mean school, get a real job, get married. have a couple of kids, get a mortgage and a couple of car payments, raise those kids without worrying too much about the evils around them, visit Mom in her nursing home, do things for others in need, and, if you have time, have a nice life too. But don't drop a single egg while you're juggling. And don't you dare miss a day of work, no matter how mind numbingly boring or lame it is, or how sleepy or depressed you feel. The only thing worse than the whining of a student is the whining of a pothead student. Grow up.
- jraines 18y ago
  Get off my lawn!
- josefresco 18y ago
  I'm grown up, have kids, mortgages (3 in fact!) and car payments and this weed ignorant college kid didn't strike me as whiny. Just slightly ignorant as I pointed out above. Let me guess edw519, you probably drink, both coffee and alcohol, you probably also consume your fair amount of sugar and possibly (although unlikely) smoke cigarettes. Why is it that smoking weed (to help you work/play) makes you winy and a pothead but it's ok to be a raging asshole if you miss your morning coffee/cig?
  - edw519 18y ago
    "Let me guess edw519, you probably...* You guess wrong, josefresco. But it doesn't really matter anyway because I never "advertised" my habits to the world. This guy did. Just slightly ignorant as I pointed out above. Ignorant I can live with. But this was also irresponsible. This is hacker news, where people post and learn and share together about doing difficult and exciting work. I realize that OP had no idea where his essay would end up, but it ended up here (at #1 no less) so that's where it warranted a response. I really don't care what anyone's personal habits are, but as soon as you write about how you use drugs to take the easy way out, and that post ends up on a site where people bust their butts to do good work and add value to other people's lives, you're fair game.
st3fan 18y ago
Personally I think smoking is disgusting and smoking pot is dumb. Thinking that smoking pot is good for you is even dumber. Health Issues of Marijuana - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Health_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Health_issues
- palish 18y ago
  Chewing tobacco is also disgusting and possibly dumb (because it causes mouth cancer), but it is not illegal. Pot is though. That's my problem with the anti-drug tirade: Nicotine is a drug and is not illegal, but THC is also a drug and is illegal. (I should probably note that I've never smoked pot.)
  - astine 18y ago
    Tobacco is a local industry. Marijuana is not. The US was built with the money from Tobacco, not Marijuana. So we can't criminalize Tobacco any more than Columbia can do away with cocaine or Afghanistan can out opium. Personally, I think that marijuana use is probably harmful, as is most drug use, but isn't worth the cost in criminalizing it.
    - jonknee 18y ago
      By some estimates, marijuana is the largest cash crop in the US. It's very much a local industry. (You probably don't have people in your neighborhood growing tobacco, but you almost certainly have people growing marijuana.) http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1
      - astine 18y ago
        Perhaps I should clarify then? Tobacco farmers goes back generations and make up a significant part of the traditional economy. They are taxed heavily and contribute a lot to the local and national economies. In general, marijuana farming goes back about generation, is not taxed (for obvious reasons) and very few people who grow marijuana really on it for there sole income. Enough of it is imported so that it is not really seen as 'American.' Maybe I'm biased, being from Virginia and having friends and associated who are small time tobacco farmers (and are nothing like the faceless monsters you see on anti-smoking adds,) But the relationship of tobacco to the economy, and the relation of marijuana to the economy are different, both in function and in perception (which is what really matters.) BTW, your link is fixed. ------------------------ Edit: That article emphasized my point. Which isn't that one is good or the other is bad, but the relationship of either to our economy is different. While production of marijuana is increasing, most of it is controlled and distributed by groups that are considered foreign, like the Mexican mob for example. In fact, a great deal of it is grown by recent immigrants whose families are being held hostage in their home countries. Needless to say this could change in light of legalization, but it's current stature is what plays a key role right now. As it stands, the people who get rich off of marijuana aren't Americans. So while legalization of Marijuana may benefit society monetarily, there is no particular interest group that stands to get rich or on which the government already depends. This was even more true at the time of the original criminalization. It's a matter of why, not whether. I've stated elsewhere that I believe marijuana ought to be legal and I'm stating here why it isn't and tobacco is. I mentioned small tobacco farmers for a different reason. Taxes, restrictions and lawsuits against tobacco increase everyday and everyday small tobacco farmers loose ground to larger tobacco firms which can deal more efficiently with the restrictions. As the restrictions increase, small tobacco will go out of business and if criminalize, the larger firms will give way to cartels every bit as troublesome as the Mexican mob. Legalize either and their's no guarantee that either will come back as a wholesome industry. (Given prohibition, it seems likely, but isn't a given.) So those that oppose one and support the other aren't necessarily hypocrites so much as tunnel visioned. Which is all I really have to say.
DanielBMarkham 18y ago
This was really funny. Dude. I used to take this college stuff so seriously, but really, after a couple of tokes, erm, it all. What were we talking about again?
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
tyn 18y ago
Marijuana actually impairs memory and learning http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10607 http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10607
- josefresco 18y ago
  All Marijuana studies actually funded in the US (they are rare and typically have 1 result) should be cautiously taken into account with the knowledge that our administration does whatever it can to spread FUD to the public about the drug. Follow the money trail ...
  - astine 18y ago
    That's an ad hominem argument write large. You can't dismiss a study just because it was funded by someone you disagree with. You have to take it on its own terms. If the study is flawed, show the flaws, if not, it shouldn't matter who funded it.
    - josefresco 18y ago
      Funding, like all procedures and data used in the study is very relevant. In a perfect world it wouldn't, but sadly who is paying the bills often dictates the results of these studies. In that perfect world, there would also be scores of scientists who are paid to analyze studies like this to prove/disapprove the conclusion, but again our imperfect system means funding for intelligent study of Marijuana is severely lacking. I would imagine getting US government funds to study the "potential damage of marijuana on x" would be a lot easier than getting funding for the "potential benefits of marijuana on y". Just because we don't see competing studies does not mean the data is not there.
      - astine 18y ago
        If the data is there, show it. I'm open. I think that the 'drug war' is a total waste of time and money, and that having one fewer red-herring for the police to chase around can only be a good thing. But you can't dismiss a study just because it was funded by biased people. All people are biased. It's up to you to attempt to look past the bias to see what is genuine, and to see to it that your own viewpoint is expressed. There are plenty of well funded liberal and libertarian groups that would be more than willing to fund the kind of research that you want. In fact I've seen stuff by Cato that would be right up your ally. You'll do far more good by finding this stuff than by criticizing the only studies being presented.
youngnh 18y ago
before clicking through, I thought this was a joke judging from the url.
patrickg-zill 18y ago
If the roughest thing in life you ever encounter are the "rigors" of a PHD program in a non-scientific field like whatever CritLit field this guy is in, then you are truly living a blessed life.
jazj 18y ago
You down with THC? Hey you know me!
jrockway 18y ago
The comments here are interesting. I think some people get upset as soon as they hear the name of an illegal drug, and instantly get ultra-defensive. You'd think people that claim to be among the most intelligent wouldn't immediately make such an emotional judgment. After all, when is the government ever right about anything? What they consider legal or illegal should not affect your judgment; 50 years ago it was essentially illegal to be black. Anyway, if you read the article and substitute "coffee" for "marijuanna", I don't think anyone would be upset. If you are against "chemical help", why would you care about the current US legal status of the drug? FWIW, I don't smoke pot, but I do drink a lot of caffeine. You could say that I'm a drug addict, and that's fine with me.
- josefresco 18y ago
  Thank you for this comment BTW, refreshing to see someone with such an open mind.
dgabriel 18y ago
For me, it just makes me paranoid, sleepy, or sick, which are three good reasons to avoid it. I pass no judgment on others, though. It's clearly a substance that should be legal, whereas tobacco should be banned.
- dejb 18y ago
  I was just about to vote you up then I saw the tobacco should be banned. As an ex-smoker (tobacco) I am against any smoking happening near me but banning it is not the answer.
  - dgabriel 18y ago
    The funny thing is that I'm a smoker on my third attempt to quit. Tobacco is insidious and deadly, and if it were impossible to buy, many thousands of lives would be extended, and health care costs would be significantly reduced. I don't necessarily believe any substance should be banned by the government, but comparatively, weed does far less damage.
dejb 18y ago
OK if we are talking about anecdotal evidence then how about a colleague of mine who smoked pot every day while doing his PHD. He spent several years doing very little work and then ended up having a major psychotic episode. Without people to support you this sort of thing could entirely derail your life. Fortunately he managed to complete the PHD only after getting off the pot. Having known a number of people who have smoked daily for periods in their lives and suffered from mental health issues, I have no doubts that heavy pot use contributes to mental health problems.
- 0x44 18y ago
  I've never used an illegal drug, but the plural of anecdote is not data.
  - aswanson 18y ago
    It may not be information, but it is most certainly data.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- eznet 18y ago
  I too have known people like you describe here and can say that it is more likely that they began habitually smoking marijuana because of some latent psychological conditions - and not that they formed these conditions as a result. Sure, marijuana may exaggerate seemingly innate personality characteristics, but create them? Highly unlikely. Its all about the individual's personality and mindset - same reason some individuals develop PTSD, while others walk away from the exact same traumatic experience with no lasting psychological scars. I feel confidant in saying that there are far more chronic users of marijuana who are otherwise mentally healthy than there are users who are teetering on a "major psychotic episode" - a sign that people such as your colleague are the minority, unstable demographic of the population. Also, it is far easier for individuals who 'freak out' and have embarrassing 'psychotic snaps' to point to an inanimate, socially demonized substance to blame rather than to find and accept blame with 'self'.
- 18y ago
pavelludiq 18y ago
when i was 15 or 16 i used to smoke a lot of pot. I got bored and started some more interesting hobbies, like parkour and football(real football, not that American parody of a sport). Anyway, if you are realy bored, go ahead and smoke, but if you are still bored, thats because you are a boring person, i realised im boring and started to unbore myself. Now im satisfied with my self and i don't realy need weed. If somebody offers me to go smoke i might agree, if i have nothing better to do at the moment, but for me it is esentialy the teenage anti=boredom drug. Because most teenagers are really bored a lot of them smoke.
edu 18y ago
But now it seemed like a privilege to consider economic globalization and its relation to British poetry No comment.

66 points by robg 18y ago

Wow, an entire article about the benefits of pot and working and no mention from this "Ph.D" about the difference between Indica and Sativa marijuana. For those too lazy to Google it, Sativa (usually grown outdoors) is great for working (think euphoria, and optimism), Indica (usually indoor) is for relaxing at the end of the day and "zoning out". Think 'body high' Those FUD commercials you see with the kids deflated on the couch? Indica. The commercials you don't see? Well those would be showing motivated Ph.D students working their ass off after smoking a little Sativa (apparently unaware of the chemistry behind the scenes if this article is any judge). Lesson for kids: Do your homework (this applies to your hobbies too) If you think just smoking weed will help your studies, at least make sure you're buying the right kind or a hybrid which will give you a little of both.

robg 18y ago
Every state doesn't have distribution "clubs" where all the varieties are laid out in front of you before purchase and with a sampler or two.
- josefresco 18y ago
  Right, which means you need to be aware of what you're buying from your dealer and how it effects you. Buying a big ol bag of Indica, sitting down and taking a few bong rips will NOT help you finish the writing essay or give you the inspiration to code your next application masterpiece. Most likely you'll find yourself sitting on the couch watching some crappy MTV reality show too lazy to get up and fetch the remote. My point: All weed is not created equal, ask your dealer for the kind you want (and if necessary educate him/her)
  - kaos 18y ago
    || buy the specific seeds you want, and grow them yourself in your closet!
    - josefresco 18y ago
      You can't grow a 10 foot Sativa plant in our closet. You're better off with a hybrid that's mostly Indica (smaller bushy plants). Which if you're looking for some motivation won't help you a great deal (will help your PS3 high scores though)
      - kaos 18y ago
        You're right, for pure sativas you would need a big closet. Maybe with a 75% s - 25% i, you can get close enough. (PS: i don't like to mix tech with thc).
omouse 18y ago
"Lesson for kids: Do your homework (this applies to your hobbies too)" Isn't it amazing the kinds of things people will do without the slightest bit of research?
jey 18y ago
This seems to be accurate, but I've never been able to find any scientific explanation for the difference in effect. I've heard it attributed to the different ratios of THC to CBD, but I can't find any articles/papers to confirm this.
- rms 18y ago
  There are also a number of analogs of THC present such as THC-V which is 500 times stronger than THC. http://designer-drugs.com/pte/12.162.180.114/dcd/chemistry/thc/index.html http://designer-drugs.com/pte/12.162.180.114/dcd/chemistry/t...
  - rms 18y ago
    and for anyone with a chemistry background reading the above, be warned that ordering olivetol is a quick way to get a DEA agent to show up at your door
    - aswanson 18y ago
      Damn it, I want my Kratom.
      - rms 18y ago
        the 7-hydroxymitragynine precursors are ok but I don't have the capital to set up an industrial synthesis... for any intrigued chemical engineers there is a lot of money to be made here.
        LPTS 18y ago
        Here is the thing. For anyone who's good enough at setting up chemistry equipment to be good enough for you, why wouldn't they rather make a few batches of MDMA or LSD instead. Shit, Shulgin has 3 whole books, which, in addition to being keys from an extraterrestrial into the ways our brain works and we experience ourselves, are also recipes for unique psychedelics. I could imagine people could make a lot more money then doing your legal shit a lot faster by making those analogues and distributing them at high price to the real heads that hang out at places like Alex Grey art shows or consciousness or AI conferences. You'd make a lot of money by knowing a few interesting people and supplying their scientific and artistic circles with these analogues. You could write a very interesting thesis on the results. And, you'd be advancing science a great deal. In theory of course. We would never expect authentic scientists and hackers to break the boundaries the authority system have prescribed for them. A good scientist will always obey the authorities, and only look in the allowed places for knowledge about how the world works. Any new lens with which we might perceive reality will be brushed under the rug. In fact, we will always bow down to power and aggressively attack anyone who conflicts with the normal way of looking at the world, just like the original scientists did (huh?). These laws and boundaries are essential to conventional power structures. It's scandalous and completely unhackerlike how close you come to violating these systems of control. My idea was completely hypothetical. You disgust me hippy. :)
Andys 18y ago
I've been surfing the 'net and reading the occasional pot-related article for years and this is the first time I've heard of that.

Alex3917 18y ago

"For that matter, it ain't alcohol, which is far worse for one's body and mind." Except for that not only is moderate consumption of alcohol good for you, but teetotalism is as bad for your health as being morbidly obese. How is it possible for someone to get a Ph.D. without picking up even a trace of scientific literacy?

ckuehne 18y ago
"How is it possible for someone to get a Ph.D. without picking up even a trace of scientific literacy?" One word: humanities.
josefresco 18y ago
What about for alcoholics? If refraining from something completely is bad, should we all experience LSD/Cocaine/Heroine infrequently? I would think the real damage of teetotalism would be the stress involved in constantly thinking about and addressing it. Not so much the lack of the substance in the body.
- Alex3917 18y ago
  "I would think the real damage of teetotalism would be the stress involved in constantly thinking about and addressing it." Then you would be wrong: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EED9143FF932A05751C1A9649C8B63 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E05EED9143FF...
  - josefresco 18y ago
    The large population studies this article cites aren't exactly convincing. Anyone can perform similar studies showing other correlations. The "feeding studies" are more important to scientific understanding. Also, I would think an individuals personal health profile would outweigh blanket advice like "drink moderately".
  - LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
    This article shows benefits from moderate drinking for individuals at high risk of heart disease, not the population at large: For many people moderate drinking has absolutely no benefit at all, Dr. Klatsky said. This applies to all adolescents: teenagers have a negligible risk of heart disease and for them the risks of heavy drinking vastly outweigh any benefits of moderate drinking. The same generally applies to men under 40 and women under 50, except for those with known heart disease risks. Pregnant women, people with liver disease, known drinking problems or a family history of alcoholism should never be advised to begin to drink for their health, he said. But for others with known coronary heart disease or a risk of heart disease because of obesity, cholesterol levels, or smoking, moderate alcohol use may be a way to reduce that risk. It is important to look at context when reading about these sorts of studies.

petercooper 18y ago

Before anyone starts taking this guy seriously, consider the impact that drug use could have on your life in terms of the social effects rather than the drug itself. Being arrested for possession (or, worse, dealing) could invalidate you from easy worldwide travel (merely having been arrested - let alone charged - invalidates you from many visa waiver programs), numerous professions, and delay certain opportunities. You have to seriously consider whether you can get away with it, and, if you don't, whether you can handle the consequences. I'm not pro or anti drugs, but I'm very much anti people ruining their future for the sake of some temporary fun. But if you know you can deal with it, enjoy it!

yummyfajitas 18y ago
It's not particularly difficult for a white/asian middle class person (most people here, I'm guessing) to avoid getting busted. It's not like the cops are out to get you. Just don't take pot onto the subway or speed while it's in your car, and you should be fine.
cmos 18y ago
In the US the consequences will vary depending on what state you live in. In upstate NY, sitting in traffic court for an evening I learned that every single case for 'possession' (all small amounts - not 'intent to distribute') was given a $50 fine and nothing on their record. What would the 20's have been if everyone was too scared to go to a speakeasy?
- Alex3917 18y ago
  The actual NY state law as explained by NORML: "Possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana is punishable by a fine of $100 for the first offense." 25g is .88 ounces, which is what a recreational smoker might consume in an entire year. It's worth noting though that the punishments are much harsher if you get caught smoking or displaying weed in public.
  - anamax 18y ago
    > 25g is .88 ounces, which is what a recreational smoker might consume in an entire year. Then all of the smokers that I knew were professionals.

edw519 18y ago

Oh you poor baby! You have trouble reading and writing and 'rithmetic, so you need a little chemical help. You pussy. Get out of cocoon, er I mean school, get a real job, get married. have a couple of kids, get a mortgage and a couple of car payments, raise those kids without worrying too much about the evils around them, visit Mom in her nursing home, do things for others in need, and, if you have time, have a nice life too. But don't drop a single egg while you're juggling. And don't you dare miss a day of work, no matter how mind numbingly boring or lame it is, or how sleepy or depressed you feel. The only thing worse than the whining of a student is the whining of a pothead student. Grow up.

jraines 18y ago
Get off my lawn!
josefresco 18y ago
I'm grown up, have kids, mortgages (3 in fact!) and car payments and this weed ignorant college kid didn't strike me as whiny. Just slightly ignorant as I pointed out above. Let me guess edw519, you probably drink, both coffee and alcohol, you probably also consume your fair amount of sugar and possibly (although unlikely) smoke cigarettes. Why is it that smoking weed (to help you work/play) makes you winy and a pothead but it's ok to be a raging asshole if you miss your morning coffee/cig?
- edw519 18y ago
  "Let me guess edw519, you probably...* You guess wrong, josefresco. But it doesn't really matter anyway because I never "advertised" my habits to the world. This guy did. Just slightly ignorant as I pointed out above. Ignorant I can live with. But this was also irresponsible. This is hacker news, where people post and learn and share together about doing difficult and exciting work. I realize that OP had no idea where his essay would end up, but it ended up here (at #1 no less) so that's where it warranted a response. I really don't care what anyone's personal habits are, but as soon as you write about how you use drugs to take the easy way out, and that post ends up on a site where people bust their butts to do good work and add value to other people's lives, you're fair game.

st3fan 18y ago

Personally I think smoking is disgusting and smoking pot is dumb. Thinking that smoking pot is good for you is even dumber. Health Issues of Marijuana - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Health_issues http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Health_issues

palish 18y ago
Chewing tobacco is also disgusting and possibly dumb (because it causes mouth cancer), but it is not illegal. Pot is though. That's my problem with the anti-drug tirade: Nicotine is a drug and is not illegal, but THC is also a drug and is illegal. (I should probably note that I've never smoked pot.)
- astine 18y ago
  Tobacco is a local industry. Marijuana is not. The US was built with the money from Tobacco, not Marijuana. So we can't criminalize Tobacco any more than Columbia can do away with cocaine or Afghanistan can out opium. Personally, I think that marijuana use is probably harmful, as is most drug use, but isn't worth the cost in criminalizing it.
  - jonknee 18y ago
    By some estimates, marijuana is the largest cash crop in the US. It's very much a local industry. (You probably don't have people in your neighborhood growing tobacco, but you almost certainly have people growing marijuana.) http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=2735017&page=1
    - astine 18y ago
      Perhaps I should clarify then? Tobacco farmers goes back generations and make up a significant part of the traditional economy. They are taxed heavily and contribute a lot to the local and national economies. In general, marijuana farming goes back about generation, is not taxed (for obvious reasons) and very few people who grow marijuana really on it for there sole income. Enough of it is imported so that it is not really seen as 'American.' Maybe I'm biased, being from Virginia and having friends and associated who are small time tobacco farmers (and are nothing like the faceless monsters you see on anti-smoking adds,) But the relationship of tobacco to the economy, and the relation of marijuana to the economy are different, both in function and in perception (which is what really matters.) BTW, your link is fixed. ------------------------ Edit: That article emphasized my point. Which isn't that one is good or the other is bad, but the relationship of either to our economy is different. While production of marijuana is increasing, most of it is controlled and distributed by groups that are considered foreign, like the Mexican mob for example. In fact, a great deal of it is grown by recent immigrants whose families are being held hostage in their home countries. Needless to say this could change in light of legalization, but it's current stature is what plays a key role right now. As it stands, the people who get rich off of marijuana aren't Americans. So while legalization of Marijuana may benefit society monetarily, there is no particular interest group that stands to get rich or on which the government already depends. This was even more true at the time of the original criminalization. It's a matter of why, not whether. I've stated elsewhere that I believe marijuana ought to be legal and I'm stating here why it isn't and tobacco is. I mentioned small tobacco farmers for a different reason. Taxes, restrictions and lawsuits against tobacco increase everyday and everyday small tobacco farmers loose ground to larger tobacco firms which can deal more efficiently with the restrictions. As the restrictions increase, small tobacco will go out of business and if criminalize, the larger firms will give way to cartels every bit as troublesome as the Mexican mob. Legalize either and their's no guarantee that either will come back as a wholesome industry. (Given prohibition, it seems likely, but isn't a given.) So those that oppose one and support the other aren't necessarily hypocrites so much as tunnel visioned. Which is all I really have to say.

DanielBMarkham 18y ago

This was really funny. Dude. I used to take this college stuff so seriously, but really, after a couple of tokes, erm, it all. What were we talking about again?

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

tyn 18y ago

Marijuana actually impairs memory and learning http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10607 http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10607

josefresco 18y ago
All Marijuana studies actually funded in the US (they are rare and typically have 1 result) should be cautiously taken into account with the knowledge that our administration does whatever it can to spread FUD to the public about the drug. Follow the money trail ...
- astine 18y ago
  That's an ad hominem argument write large. You can't dismiss a study just because it was funded by someone you disagree with. You have to take it on its own terms. If the study is flawed, show the flaws, if not, it shouldn't matter who funded it.
  - josefresco 18y ago
    Funding, like all procedures and data used in the study is very relevant. In a perfect world it wouldn't, but sadly who is paying the bills often dictates the results of these studies. In that perfect world, there would also be scores of scientists who are paid to analyze studies like this to prove/disapprove the conclusion, but again our imperfect system means funding for intelligent study of Marijuana is severely lacking. I would imagine getting US government funds to study the "potential damage of marijuana on x" would be a lot easier than getting funding for the "potential benefits of marijuana on y". Just because we don't see competing studies does not mean the data is not there.
    - astine 18y ago
      If the data is there, show it. I'm open. I think that the 'drug war' is a total waste of time and money, and that having one fewer red-herring for the police to chase around can only be a good thing. But you can't dismiss a study just because it was funded by biased people. All people are biased. It's up to you to attempt to look past the bias to see what is genuine, and to see to it that your own viewpoint is expressed. There are plenty of well funded liberal and libertarian groups that would be more than willing to fund the kind of research that you want. In fact I've seen stuff by Cato that would be right up your ally. You'll do far more good by finding this stuff than by criticizing the only studies being presented.

youngnh 18y ago

before clicking through, I thought this was a joke judging from the url.

patrickg-zill 18y ago

If the roughest thing in life you ever encounter are the "rigors" of a PHD program in a non-scientific field like whatever CritLit field this guy is in, then you are truly living a blessed life.

jazj 18y ago

You down with THC? Hey you know me!

jrockway 18y ago

The comments here are interesting. I think some people get upset as soon as they hear the name of an illegal drug, and instantly get ultra-defensive. You'd think people that claim to be among the most intelligent wouldn't immediately make such an emotional judgment. After all, when is the government ever right about anything? What they consider legal or illegal should not affect your judgment; 50 years ago it was essentially illegal to be black. Anyway, if you read the article and substitute "coffee" for "marijuanna", I don't think anyone would be upset. If you are against "chemical help", why would you care about the current US legal status of the drug? FWIW, I don't smoke pot, but I do drink a lot of caffeine. You could say that I'm a drug addict, and that's fine with me.

josefresco 18y ago
Thank you for this comment BTW, refreshing to see someone with such an open mind.

dgabriel 18y ago

For me, it just makes me paranoid, sleepy, or sick, which are three good reasons to avoid it. I pass no judgment on others, though. It's clearly a substance that should be legal, whereas tobacco should be banned.

dejb 18y ago
I was just about to vote you up then I saw the tobacco should be banned. As an ex-smoker (tobacco) I am against any smoking happening near me but banning it is not the answer.
- dgabriel 18y ago
  The funny thing is that I'm a smoker on my third attempt to quit. Tobacco is insidious and deadly, and if it were impossible to buy, many thousands of lives would be extended, and health care costs would be significantly reduced. I don't necessarily believe any substance should be banned by the government, but comparatively, weed does far less damage.

dejb 18y ago

OK if we are talking about anecdotal evidence then how about a colleague of mine who smoked pot every day while doing his PHD. He spent several years doing very little work and then ended up having a major psychotic episode. Without people to support you this sort of thing could entirely derail your life. Fortunately he managed to complete the PHD only after getting off the pot. Having known a number of people who have smoked daily for periods in their lives and suffered from mental health issues, I have no doubts that heavy pot use contributes to mental health problems.

0x44 18y ago
I've never used an illegal drug, but the plural of anecdote is not data.
- aswanson 18y ago
  It may not be information, but it is most certainly data.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
eznet 18y ago
I too have known people like you describe here and can say that it is more likely that they began habitually smoking marijuana because of some latent psychological conditions - and not that they formed these conditions as a result. Sure, marijuana may exaggerate seemingly innate personality characteristics, but create them? Highly unlikely. Its all about the individual's personality and mindset - same reason some individuals develop PTSD, while others walk away from the exact same traumatic experience with no lasting psychological scars. I feel confidant in saying that there are far more chronic users of marijuana who are otherwise mentally healthy than there are users who are teetering on a "major psychotic episode" - a sign that people such as your colleague are the minority, unstable demographic of the population. Also, it is far easier for individuals who 'freak out' and have embarrassing 'psychotic snaps' to point to an inanimate, socially demonized substance to blame rather than to find and accept blame with 'self'.
18y ago

pavelludiq 18y ago

when i was 15 or 16 i used to smoke a lot of pot. I got bored and started some more interesting hobbies, like parkour and football(real football, not that American parody of a sport). Anyway, if you are realy bored, go ahead and smoke, but if you are still bored, thats because you are a boring person, i realised im boring and started to unbore myself. Now im satisfied with my self and i don't realy need weed. If somebody offers me to go smoke i might agree, if i have nothing better to do at the moment, but for me it is esentialy the teenage anti=boredom drug. Because most teenagers are really bored a lot of them smoke.

edu 18y ago

But now it seemed like a privilege to consider economic globalization and its relation to British poetry No comment.