bronbron

10 ms·

31.
by bronbron 12y ago
> The community is typically a pretty big aspect of a business 'The community' is an extremely nebulous term, and unlikely to be influencing any business decision, largely because any individual's perception of the communi
32.
by bronbron 12y ago
> I noticed you get unwarrantedly defensive Uhh I don't think he was defensive at all. I think he made a very good point. I would bet large amounts of bitcoins that no VC wrote any of this, save MAYBE part of the opening. It's
33.
by bronbron 12y ago
Part of me wonders if security will ever be something people actually care about, and value. Home depot had a huge, huge security breach. Their stock price? Up 12 points from last year. I'm not sure what it would take for people to rea
34.
by bronbron 12y ago
> I don't imagine you'll find that it was particularly oriented toward rehabilitation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_League_for_Penal_Reform
35.
by bronbron 12y ago
> There was a real effort in the 1950's and 1960's to turn the justice system into one more oriented toward rehabilitation Err, so there was an erroneous decade where we tried to do better? The mid 50s-60s were a discrepancy in
36.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Our justice system has evolved in light of that. I don't know that I'd say 'evolved'. You said it yourself: the homicide rate has been 5-7x higher than in England for more than a century. We're not really doing
37.
by bronbron 12y ago
Oh, sure, after reading your post I think I see what that post was getting it. I didn't originally. Originally I thought the poster meant "it can't be that simple because otherwise everyone would be 500 pounds", but yes,
38.
by bronbron 12y ago
Sure, you're right that the article isn't about weight loss, but the original comment I was responding to was: > Because a lot of people are suffering and dying of poor nutrition In the developed world, they're mostly suff
39.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Keeping weight low is the primary metric that people currently track and associate with their health, but that doesn't mean weight is the primary problem, just that people think it is. It absolutely is the primary problem for most
40.
by bronbron 12y ago
> If you take in 500 calories per day and burn 1600, that will fit the "energy burned needs to be >= energy taken in" rule, but you'll still die. In most developed nations (which, admittedly I assume HN is largely compo
41.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Very long term, energy burned will be == energy taken in. Not really, unless we're counting death. Most people gain weight as they get older. > If that's consistently out of balance by... say 100 Kcal/day, that's
42.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Except that energy burned is not by any means a 1:1 correlation with exercised performed. We are inefficient machines, and our efficiency characteristics vary wildly in ways we don't fully understand. Your basal metabolic rate is
43.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Nutrition isn't exclusively (or even primarily) about weight loss. Maintaining a healthy weight is the primary health problem for the vast majority of people concerned about their personal nutrition.
44.
by bronbron 12y ago
Not to sound like a dick, but: > Neither of which have any direct or consistent correlation to physical activity or food consumed. is almost always bullshit. People who truthfully track their calories and err on the side of caution (did
45.
by bronbron 12y ago
> we don't know basic things about what's good and bad for us. Errr, I think we know these 'basic' things quite fine. Energy burned needs to be >= energy taken in. It's just complicated for other reasons. Ther
46.
by bronbron 12y ago
It's worth considering that he's with ESPN, and sports is an unusual case. Television shows and movies don't have nearly the timeliness factor sports broadcasting has. If I see guardians of the galaxy a week after it comes ou
47.
by bronbron 12y ago
That's funny, my experience has been the complete opposite.
48.
by bronbron 12y ago
Totally did the same thing. Thanks for the explanation, really cleared it up.
49.
by bronbron 12y ago
I think they should follow through on reducing to 7 innings per game (with all the rules about extra innings still applicable). Sure, it would more-or-less destroy relief pitching as a profession, but relief pitchers are basically the place
50.
by bronbron 12y ago
Hm, I don't think the title quite follows from the article. There might be an association, but even supposing there is causation the independent/dependent variables aren't necessarily known here: people with low social trust
51.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Your hypothesis about rental markets diminishing in areas without rent control You should re-read what he wrote. That's not his hypothesis.
52.
by bronbron 12y ago
> Society would be better if no one had any secrets. Maybe, except that because information asymmetry provides an advantage, and sometimes a huge one, there will always be an incredibly strong incentive for each individual to keep secret
53.
by bronbron 12y ago
Interesting! Certainly seems to be the exception, but good to know nonetheless.
54.
by bronbron 12y ago
> trying to get different kinds of people to agree to the same laws at the same time. That seems inevitable, even two people won't agree on an entire body of laws. > What is your feeling about open carry laws? Someone comes from
55.
by bronbron 12y ago
> For those who don't know, laws are different, sometimes in major ways, when you cross a state line That seems like a recipe for a huge disaster that we should rectify. It's incredibly easy to cross state lines without purpose
56.
by bronbron 12y ago
It's interesting watching it unfold in real-time. I've expressed opinions that could be considered 'anti-gentrification' in the past, but the process itself is basically unstoppable. Attempts to stem the flow of gentrifi
57.
by bronbron 12y ago
I see you're conveniently ignoring my other points (that you're arguing against a straw man, that implementation is a key issue) besides your incredibly dumb appropriation of the gay rights plight as an analogy for drug legalizati
58.
by bronbron 12y ago
> (which necessarily must be hyperbolic) Why? > to contrast the features of your argument (I think both have a couple of the same fallacies in their structure) You were assuming I was arguing about something completely different (some
59.
by bronbron 12y ago
> The rest of your post misunderstood a hypothetical I raised to compare and contrast with your argument, and I won't be addressing it No, I didn’t misunderstand it. It was dumb at best, and incredibly insensitive at worst (I’m sure
60.
by bronbron 12y ago
No, I understood their point. It was a dumb hyperbolic analogy and it received a dumb loaded argument in retort.

More ›