jstevewhite
J. Steve White
jstevewhite

I wasn't saying that I think it's appropriate to class people who challenge the usefulness of medications based on evidence with the nuts; I was saying that if you go around telling people that evidence shows that SSRIs do not perform the function they're sold and taken for at all, many people will class you with the

I enjoyed your explanation, and I agree that Reiki is woo. That said, I think your statement is a bit reductive. There are many medical treatments that have been demonstrated to outperform a placebo, yet we have no understanding of their method of action. Then, of course, there are many that have been certified and

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Confusing epidemiology with causal studies is a significant oversight. And your own experience correlated with the personal experience of people you know is a tiny, self-selected data set unlikely to tell you anything important about anything but you and your friends. And there was

I've written before that toxins are the new evil humors. Toxins serve the same explanatory purpose as evil humors did in the Middle Ages. They are invisible, but all around us. They constantly threaten people, often people who unaware of their very existence. They are no longer viewed as evil in themselves, but it is

Crazy. I don't know crap about C# (Windows, right? Or Microsoft, anyway. Innit what Mono is supposed to be? .Net or something?) but if I have google, I bet I could complete your test in thirty minutes. With the exception of Haskell(LOL) I've always pretty much been able to say "Gimme a reference and I can write code;

I absolutely HATE the "rate yourself from 1 to x" questions. The audience matters, and unless there's an objective rating system, the audience will decide whether the rating is accurate. "Rate yourself on your Linux knowledge." Who is asking? A Project Manager, or Linus Torvalds?

I agree, but there's a difference between, "Would you like to have lunch with me?" and "Hey, guys, it's lunchtime. Let's get something to eat!"

Well, I don't know your situation directly. However, I was converted to salary back in the early 2ks. Check your company's handbook. Ours (then) said we had to work at least fifteen minutes to count as a 'day'. Since then, the number has been, at various jobs, 2 hours, 1 hour, four hours, and this one counts 1 hour as

Yeah, sometimes that doesn't even work. In my job early on as a core network support engineer in wireless systems, all of our production machines ran *nix of one sort or another, so we all wanted *nix machines on our desk to use for our real work, with the IT provided winblows lappies sitting next to them for email.

That's the problem. Businesses use the "secret wages" specifically so they can keep wages low. If the job is worth $1.25 an hour more, why shouldn't others who do that job make that much as well? I'm more than happy to help my coworkers increase their negotiating leverage.

If lunch has a specific business purpose, I expect the PM to pick up the tab. If it's just a business lunch, I expect the sales guys to pick up the tab. If it's a buncha folks from work going out for an ad hoc lunch, we split the tab. How much you make doesn't have any impact on the tab, IMO, unless you're feeling

But did a redditor send her PIZZA? That's the question.

You're missing the point completely. Being a philosophy grad doesn't certify understanding of systems. The ethics in question will be decided by the programmer (or his/her handlers), in the same way that a programmer had to decide that it's ethical to automatically lock the door of a submarine when there is a breach,


InstaMorph or other "Friendly Plastic" that melts at low temp and hardens into very tough, very strong plastic. You can mold it into handles, parts, etc. Great stuff.

A BASIN WRENCH. You never know what one of these things is for, or that you need one, until you need to wrench on something that's recessed deeply - such as those nuts that hold the faucet on your sink, squeezed up between the wall and the side of the sink. I've used it on lots of stuff that I just couldn't get a

Yeah, it's gotta balance, and be appropriate. You can't throw people ribbons when they're not even breaking a sweat, but there's nothing wrong with a "good job!" even then. It's important not to discourage people from trying new things, but it's also important (in business) to let people know that success is preferred

I'm sold on these Anker chargers (amazon). I've got three different models, all are great performers. When you have as many doohickeys to charge as my family does, they are indispensable.

"Circular"? In what regard? Or do you mean "unfalsifiable", a la Sampson?

I suspect that many of the fundamental tenets of UG as currently advanced will turn out to be wrong, but I also suspect there's a kernel of truth in there as well. We have a huge body of evidence of inherited behaviors (see twins studies,

I think dismissing Chomsky's work out of hand is shortsighted and misleading.

My problem has rarely been quantity of money specifically; it's been reliability of source. I could be happy with less if I could be certain it would never be cut off - that's where my anxiety all comes from. I mean, I'm as "safe" as anyone in the industry, but that's not "safe" enough for me to relax.