Hm. I never aim to arrive sooner than 90minutes before departure—and that’s only because baggage drop closes 60mins before.
If without luggage, I aim for 60min, no matter whether domestic or international.
Never missed a flight yet.
Samuel Hapák
Karma: 246
So, I am utterly confused about this whole Buddhist thing. It seems to me that the main goal is to stop existing, essentially die but really truly die, so that person stops suffering. At least that was my understanding of what Nirvana is trying to be. Is that correct or wrong?
Also, I notice a strong obsession with suffering. Yeah, I do suffer here and there, but I don’t make a big deal out of it. I am not even sure I would want all the pain and suffering gone permanently from my life. It feels to me that some discomfort is actively needed in life at least to serve as a backdrop to pleasure. Am I crazy for thinking so?
Sure. What I was trying to point at was that the manual acknowledges that this is actually bad and that things could be done differently. That’s a surprising level of lucidity that I wouldn’t expect to see these days in any government force.
I believe this wasn’t always the case. See the CIA sabotage manual from the WW2
Well, of course, WHAT takes priority. And you need subordinates who have guts to do the right thing even if it contradicts the stated HOW.
I like the “learn the rules before you break them” approach.
In my organization, I tell people that they can break any rule / best practice they truly understand and truly mastered.
Nah. Good organizations impose both what and how. Look at Bezos imposing how meetings should be run.
Btw just a funny thing, it seems that Slovakia (my country) is actually producing one of the top baby carriers in the world.
Baby carrying is quite popular and people are quite knowledgeable re refining here (eg no front facing carrying, no kangaroo carriers, etc)
Check out this brand: https://www.sestrice.com/en/
Yeah. Headline caught my attention and I was expecting that the content would follow, but there was none.
My intent is not to comment on your skill, but to rather warn you of the discipline itself. It seems you feel you’re gaining some profound knowledge by this pondering—I am afraid though this is just illusion—and a dangerous one. Just wanted to warn you of that.
I am afraid that you are just cobbling words together. Which is what happens to most philosophers.
The problem is that you are using poorly defined worlds such as empty, intrinsic, change, interdependend, etc. These words have meanings that depends on the context they are used in—they are not well defined—used without further clarification they just point towards some cluster of terms.
And this is how the word soup is cooked.
I agree. I was not precise in my statement—what I wanted to say was that if for some reason they are trying to use it in place of picture, as a decoration (which I can’t really see why), then this would be the approach. Still, I think using ligature for the word Google is the right approach.
I don’t see this as anyhow reasonable still. This eg will break all the screen readers as well. If you really want to do this, use specialized font and a single unprintable Unicode character instead. Like font awesome does.
Well, using ligature to display ‘Google’ with slanted ‘e’ would be just fine. But why in the heavens would someone make a completely different set of characters “googlelogoligature” draw as “Google”? That’s just stupid.
It’s very simple. We have the following assumptions (axioms):
for any two states, you prefer one over the other, or, you are indifferent, we will say A > B to mark A is preferred over B, A~B to say that you are indifferent, and A ≥ B to say you are either preferring A or you are indifferent.
if A ≥ B and B ≥ C, then A ≥ C, and at the same time A ~ C iff both A ~ B and B ~ C.
~ is equivalency relation (behaves like =)
The conclusion of above assumptions is no cycles. Now, each of them seems as a reasonable assumption. Sure, we can choose different set of axioms, but why? What are we trying to model?
I wonder if this lurch happens at the two meter mark in countries that use the metric system?
No way. First, we do centimeters, so 195cm not 1.95m.
Second, 2m is crazy high. You pity people over 2m for their terrible life in a society that is not accustomed to that height, you don’t envy them.
Is there any chance for her to win? I mean, whether it happened or not, it’s word against word, right?
No. Nuclear plant has a fixed output, zero elasticity of production. It has to sell all the electricity it produces, even if it should sell it for 0.
But, it doesn’t really matter. There certainly exists such a day price that nuclear is competitive with solar and is able to sell the same amount of produce as before.
No. Average price must go down. The evening price might go up—it might go up even to the level where the average price doesn’t change at all, but it can’t go up to the level where average price would rise.
Think about it. You run a nuclear plant. Suddenly, due to solar competition, the day price went to 10%. You can’t turn nuclear off just during the day, so you keep it running and lower your day price to 10% as well. Your costs didn’t change, so to keep the same level of profitability, you need to rise the night price to 190%. This way your revenue doesn’t change.
There is no reason why you would be able to rise the price above that level.
I don’t get what is the issue with rotating cylinder and stability. As I imagine the cylinder, it has radius << length, thus his axis of rotation will be the one with the smallest possible moment of innertia and thus should be stable.
Dzhanibekov effect applies only to 2nd principal axis so should be relevant only for cylinders with radius similar to length.
The thumbnail is framed as super important, a critical component that creates other criticials, and needs to be in place in advance. Feels weird that you can’t go back and modify it later if the video changes?
The idea is that you want to have a high CTR, so you need to have a good thumbnail. If you do a video that can’t be turned into a best thumbnail possible, you are screwed. The only way to fix this is to redo the video. Thus, that’s the reason you should start with thumbnail.
Being “defensive” is not a synonymous with “defending oneself”, at least not in a way these words are typically used.
Being “defensive” implies usage of dirty practices, such as ad hominem, emotional manipulation, misrepresentation of the other party. Essentially, party behaving in a way where a normal good-faith constructive conversation is not possible.
I find it uncontroversial that such a behavior is considered suspicious and undesirable.