To write a comment on this website I can click on “reply”, then write my text and click “submit”. On Wikipedia I would have to click on “edit” then find the right section to reply to. Once I have found it I have to decide on the right combination of * and : to put in front of my reply. After I wrote my comment I have to sign it by writing ~~~~. After jumping through those hoops I can click on “publish” (a recent change because user research suggested people were confused by “save”).
Then if I’m lucky my post is published. If I’m unlucky I have to deal with a merge conflict. It’s hard for me to see Wikipedia here as user-friendly.
This creates a pressure where some discussion about Wiki editing get pushed to Facebook or Telegram groups that are more user-friendly to use because it takes a lot less effort to write a new message.
When it comes to menus you have a left side menus. You have the menus on the left and right side on the top of the article. Then you have the top menu on the right side. It’s not clear to a new user why “related changes” is somewhere completely different then “history”.
More importantly the kind of results that A/B testing reveals are often not as obvious but there effects accumulate. The fact that Wikipedia lost editors over the last decade is for me a sign that they weren’t effective at evolving software that people actually want to use to contribute.
As far as I understand eating before sleep raises your pulse as more blood has to flow through your intestines and thus usually leads to less deep sleep.
It might damage your sleep in a way that leads you to be less rested the next morning even through you don’t notice that you had trouble entering sleep.
It might be useful to be more clear about what kind of food to eat when you find that eating something is good.
Personally, I can eat a bit of soup before going to bed without producing much spike in heart-rate.
What metric do you use to determine it works to eat right before bed?
The amount of information that a dating profile provides doesn’t allow someone to really strongly want you for deep reasons. In most cases people it will just be a sign of the person thinking that they don’t have that many choices for pursuing a partner that looks better on paper.
Empirically, as a trend across the industry, this has turned out to be false. “Design by A/B test” has dramaticallyeroded the quality of UI/UX design over the last 10-15 years.
At the first glance this seems to me like “everything was better in the past”. It seems to me like a website that’s stuck in how things were done in the past like Wikipedia which doesn’t do any A/B tests loses in usability compared to more modern websites that are highly optimized.
In the company where I work we don’t have A/B test and plenty of changes are made for reasons of internal company politics and as a result the users still suffer from bad UI changes.
Why is that the case? Sleep apnea seems to be defined as a period with lower oxygen saturation in the blood with should be possible to be measured at home as well.
I have some experiences that suggest that I’m more likely to snore when I’m not sleeping in my own comfortable bed. It might be that the in-lab sleep test induces the sleep apnea on it’s own and isn’t representative of normal sleep.
Just like daters don’t optimize their photo’s with photo-feelers people writing job applications in countries where the job application has a photo don’t optimize the photo either.
It seems to me like most people have a strange relationship to photo’s that is irrelevant from any concerns about dating.
When self identity is attached to a given problem it’s emotionally harder to think sanely about it.
Regarding pictures, I think you underestimate the effort required.
You need to get a phone or camera capable of taking good-looking picture, you need someone that is semi-competent at shooting, you need nice looking clothes and a good-enough looking background. These are all things that need to be planned/accounted for. It also takes time.
This is wrong. This summer I got some pictures taken from a professional photographer with professional equipment.
I put them on Tinder and then got less matches. A while later I put my new photo’s on PhotoFeeler and it turns out they indeed score less then my old picture that was taken by having someone simply holding my mobile phone with a setting where it made 1 picture per second and then mining the resulting photo pool for the best photo’s with PhotoFeeler.
This response is quite interesting as the exchange is basically:
OP: Why aren’t people doing strategy A for area O to persue goal X.
You: Because doing strategy B for area O is very effortful.
it’s better for the general success of the tribe when everyone has a kid
Group selection arguments are generally lose in data driven evolutionary analysis.
If you have a kid with a person who has a lot of resources because they have the attractive characteristic of having a lot of social status and your mate passes down genes that make the child healthier and stronger, you are more likely to ultimately pass down your genes.
My criticism isn’t mainly about the conclusion but about the epistemics, epistemics being one of the main subjects of LW.
However, I think, as another commenter has pointed out, you maybe could serve your argument better by digging deeper into the examples in the pattern of behavior you believe to have exemplified here and ask, “Why?”
While that’s a step in the right direction, there’s still a good chance that you don’t understand things from the outside.
If you want to understand how the news work it’s important to read views from experts that actually have domain knowledge.
The difference between the Western tradition and Eastern traditions are often a bit exaggerated.
Within Western monasteries people engage in meditative practices. Historically, meditation wasn’t central in Buddhism either.
Most older spiritual tradition put a lot of value on secrecy and modern Buddhism and later New Agey thinking is more open to selling meditation courses to a wide public (both for money and for external recognition).
It’s quite different to work on learning an existing concept and to work on drawing conceptual boundaries yourself in a way that works for your context.
There’s a group of numbers between 0.38976 and 1.1. A given culture might decide to call those numbers A*-numbers. Another group might call the numbers between 0.35 and 1.2 B*-numbers.
I would say that both A* and B* were invented by the groups that use them. It’s unlikely that another group of people would come up with the same conceptualization even if they would investigate the same problem domain.
It seems to me likely that Kensho is similar. It’s a conceptual cluster that the Japanese use, but other traditions of meditations don’t use the same conceptual cluster.
Your conceptualization assumes that it would be good for a person who wants to learn something about meditative states to learn about how the Japanese conceptualize kensho and then try to work their way to the state. That approach conflicts with meditation paradigms that value “beginners mind”.
It seems to me that the epistemics of your article are those of standard conspiracy theory. You see a pattern and instead of looking deeper for evidence whether the pattern is true you write a post proposing it’s true by pointing to the pattern.
I don’t think this answer addresses the point of in what sense Kensho exists for you in that case.
What kind of experiences were the hard lesson? How did the moments of learning look like?
If there’s a strong correlation that would be very valuable information for anybody that hires programmers.
Yes, somehow I messed that up. Smooth heart rate comes with stress and produces low HRV.iver twice’ comes to mind.
I don’t think you can have a coherent concept of position that allows for both of those notions. I think you have to decide for either a concept where a position can be repeated which implies there’s some criteria that you can use to say that a position was repeated or treat it like a river that can’t crossed twice.
I am trying to distinguish between the position you think you are in (for want of better wording) v. the actual position (the aimed for position v. reality - if trying to do a pose).
Thomas Hanna introduced the term soma to refer to the way the body feels from inside. In German we have the word “Leib” as distinct from “Körper” to also refer to how the subjective body felt from the inside.
How the body feels from the inside isn’t the same as how I think my body is. It’s quite possible for the two to derivative. A person with an amputated limb might know that they don’t have the limb anymore but that doesn’t mean that the soma of it isn’t there anymore and can’t hurt.
Reading Feldenkrais (Awareness Through Movement) or Hanna (Somatics: Reawakening The Mind’s Control Of Movement, Flexibility, And Health) might be useful for exploring that space.
HRV = heart rate variability? A smooth heart rate has a low HRV I would have thought?
Yes, somehow I messed that up. Smooth heart rate comes with strees and produces low HRV.
Reading your post it seems a bit strange to me to speak about having conscious proprioception as something that most people don’t have. I would estimate that most people have a sense of conscious proprioception and it’s more about the quality of the proprioception.