sumy23

16 ms·

31.
by sumy23 4y ago
Damn, if only I could fill up my car with natural gas.
32.
by sumy23 4y ago
> There are definitely enough talented writers Based on? There aren't even many good technical writers, which is a lot easier than writing fiction.
33.
by sumy23 4y ago
We might simply be at peak content. Better content requires better talent. The pool of talent is finite. Perhaps there aren't enough talented writers and producers to make better content happen.
34.
by sumy23 4y ago
I agree that younger talent has been especially underserved by remote working, but simply having an office to optionally go to won't fix that. The young talent will come in, and the older talent will stay home. My company has an office
35.
by sumy23 4y ago
It might be easier to arrange, but I don't want to leave my kids for weeks at a time. Young children change every day. I've been away from my daughter for a few days and have already missed out of some of her development.
36.
by sumy23 4y ago
> I’m not blocked because I always have other tasks waiting. Sure, it's not like every time you need to talk to someone you're blocked. But, at least in my experience, it's definitely possible to be blocked waiting for som
37.
by sumy23 4y ago
Yes, of course we have work chat. But everyone is just a little green dot. Often people will be in another meeting or afk, so you'll send a ping and then wait for 30 minutes for them to get back. Or you'll forget to ping them when
38.
by sumy23 4y ago
> I don't have random desk drop-ins pulling me out of work flow Yes, in my experience the people who enjoy working from home are those that prioritize their work over the work of others because it allows for fewer "distractions
39.
by sumy23 4y ago
I love working from home, but I love it because it's personally convenient for me. The quality of my work is definitely lower. I honestly don't know how people think working from home is more effective. Even as an engineer, which
40.
by sumy23 4y ago
Ok, but clearly this article is arguing that in fact, human learning is not a complex system, at least in terms of synapse function. What the Wikipedia article says is irrelevant to this new information. Again, there is no connection betwee
41.
by sumy23 4y ago
> My original statement was to say that smoking nicotine is the leading cause of preventable death. See, you've assumed that A implies B means B implies A again. Smoking tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death. Nicotine
42.
by sumy23 4y ago
Ivermectin cream. They are believed to cause rosacea, but are typically harmless if not beneficial.
43.
by sumy23 4y ago
To me it perfectly illustrates that the words that are said are in fact the words you hear.
44.
by sumy23 4y ago
Some of the best advice I've ever received was in Adventure Time. "Sucking at something is the first step towards being sorta good at something."
45.
by sumy23 4y ago
I had a similar experience to you. You must come to the understanding that you will never smoke a cigarette again. You must accept that. You can't quit without that being true (modulo the social cigarette here and there). And yea, I re
46.
by sumy23 4y ago
Sorry, but you're making the same logical error of assuming that A implies B means B implies A. Let me help you understand: > It's not that A implies B. It's that B [did you mean A?] is contained within B. "A implie
47.
by sumy23 4y ago
The issue with this piece of work is that the author hasn't even attempted to think of reasons for results he/she plotted. Simply presenting provocative data without adequate attempts to explain the results is irresponsible. Peopl
48.
by sumy23 4y ago
What is the delta-T in the graphs? I took that to mean delta from the average temperature, but then some of the graphs don't make sense. For instance, the fitted line for delta-T in the Stockholm data is entirely < 0, which wouldn&#
49.
by sumy23 4y ago
This is a classic logical of error. Just because A implies B doesn't mean B implies A. Smoking tobacco is a form of nicotine consumption, but that doesn't mean you can substitute "nicotine consumption" any place you see
50.
by sumy23 4y ago
I just tried reading some of the things written by Twitter's test authors. I immediately missed the old format. For one, the old format forces succinct points. There isn't any fluff in a Twitter thread. First four paragraphs in th
51.
by sumy23 4y ago
But why compare a cancer patient to a heart attack patient? What about smokers that die of heart disease, which they are more likely to get? What about non-smokers that die of cancer at 80 after a decade of chemo? Or the elderly that die at
52.
by sumy23 4y ago
But you also receive social security and Medicare, which are the two of the largest government expenditures. You’re not making a convincing argument that living longer is a revenue positive for the government.
53.
by sumy23 4y ago
> Dying younger is not a benefit. It is when talking about healthcare costs.
54.
by sumy23 4y ago
Ok, but is consuming nicotine the leading cause of preventable death, or is smoking tobacco?
55.
by sumy23 4y ago
> however, e-cigarettes end up saving billions in health care dollars I believe the jury is still out on whether or not smokers have more expensive health care requirements than non-smokers. Smokers tend to die younger and quicker than n
56.
by sumy23 4y ago
Yes, but you're not answering why it's better to convert the captured CO2 into e-fuel rather than sequester it directly. My point is that converting to e-fuel instead of direct sequestration only makes sense if you can produce e-f
57.
by sumy23 4y ago
I don't think investing in short-term at-the-money options would be a good strategy because you'd lose a lot to premiums. It'd be better package long positions on the low-fee ETFs mixed with some deep otm options as an invest
58.
by sumy23 4y ago
Ok well that's a bad assumption. Atmospheric capture is basically impossible (at scale) due to the size of the atmosphere and the density of carbon within it. Atmospheric capture is not something I'd bet the farm on.
59.
by sumy23 4y ago
Sorry, but I'm still not seeing how e-fuels are beneficial without violating the laws of thermodynamics. A plane is going to produce the same amount of CO2 whether kerosene or e-kerosene is used. The only way e-kerosene makes sense is
60.
by sumy23 4y ago
Yes, but 14% of jobs is a huge number. Healthcare is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, employment sectors.

More ›