I see fellow Americans more needy than I am as humans and have packaged and delivered hot meals to them for years, but I think as a society we can still be responsible both with meeting our citizens’ needs and with stewarding our country’s resources.
The underlying values are more fundamental than your framing of them (…

See? Those are some responsible questions that contribute to a good conversation. Rather than knee-jerk blathering about its undeniable insanity due to its source, its good to see some fair acknowledgement of potential merits and a desire to work through its perceived problems for the common good.

Refer to this former Lifehacker article about types of alcohol and hangovers...it’s unlikely that an entire style of beer is capable of giving you a worse hangover than another (i.e. heavy IPAs vs cheap lagers).

More ignorance. The chart shows predicted probability. Read the thread or study up on your statistics if you don’t understand how that’s different from the raw response data. I’ll keep it simple for you...search “95%” in the study text.

It’s bothersome because these blogs are interest-based and topical. If I want to read about life hacks, I come here. If I’m a tech geek I go to Gizmodo. Except these sites are ever more polluted by off-topic nonsense that is kept less and less in check by the editors. They don’t have to post stuff I agree with, just…

Absolutely. Unfortunately, it still takes a degree of wisdom and maturity to confront your own biases.

Well, if you’re talking about entropy, that means they become more disordered, which is different than the type of decline that’s at the heart of declinism. More importantly, is it DEK-lin-izm or de-KLYN-izm?

So an opinion post covering the author’s reaction to abortion legislation doesn’t strike you as a bit of a departure on a blog whose motto is “tips, tricks, and downloads for getting things done”? Presumably the Vitals subsite would involve tips that apply to one’s health...tell me when I’m missing the mark. ::shrugs::

That’s right! So is the author’s claim that 99% of people who had an abortion were happy with that decision correct? No, it’s not. Dig into the scientific methods that are utilized in studies like this if you’re not sure of the difference.

Classic.

Look at your little Y axis label there...see “predicted probability”? They use regression analysis to predict the odds of being a case based on the predictors or independent variables in their model. That probability was 99%. However, that’s not the same as the raw percentage of people who didn’t express regret at…

Not the error, the content. This stuff doesn’t belong on Lifehacker.

If editors would bother reading beyond their quoted study’s abstract, they would find that the percentage of participants who didn’t express regret was actually 95%, not 99% (they misquoted a different statistic), which is a small, but significant difference. [Insert Archer meme: “Are you trying to invite fake news…

The line for abuse is pretty clear and transcendent, but the cultural norms and attitudes attached to what is considered to be sexism or even more so, “inappropriate”, can vary widely over generations. As a country, we’re in a pretty judgmental place right now.

Absolutely true.

It’s “peddle”, not “pedal”, genius. As a peddler of pseudo-journalistic fiction you should have the grammatical depth to at least write your own job description.

Show of hands for a snarky plugin to replace “illegal” with “undocumented” or “person” with “victim”?

It’s a river in Egypt, Nick.

As someone stated above...head formation and differences in carbonation released might slightly impact the aromatics and drinking experience, but your headline makes a big claim with “...taste better”. I don’t think a blind test would bear that out, but I’d love to be proven wrong, too. :)

Pour speed having that much impact? Sounds dubious. How about a blind taste test between fast- and slow-poured pilsners? I’ll publish the results if I can get beer funding. C’mon, for science!