> Common mental illnesses - particularly depression and anxiety - have incredibly high placebo response rates.
In my experience, both long term, major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder only substantially improve through understanding, which of course is realized in at least 2 ways: experience and/or therapy.
We can say with some certainty that antidepressants' effectiveness is questionable, at best, long term, but of particular interest for effective indication would be any number of psychoactive substances, which routinely make headlines for this type of treatment but remain taboo for some still yet to be resolved reasons.
Of course this ultimately boils down to personal choices, but attitudes towards drugs will change before we see any real progress in this area, I'm afraid.
> ...deepfake evidence being used to frame someone for a crime, etc? Is there a reason I shouldn't be concerned about these prospects?
This is already happening, I'm reasonably certain, and until something of substance is done about it on a systemic, legal level, "deepfake" proliferation will lead to further systemic 'othering' of already-marginalized people at the expense of our own humanity.
Eventually, some of us (humans) won't be able to worry so much about engineering heaven-on-demand, as it were, when suddenly we find ourselves limited in ways we never could've imagined or ever hope to escape from.
People will continue to point and laugh by way of social media, but for how long and at what, or more importantly, whose expense? These are serious questions, which the general public has been plainly ignoring until recently- and that's being entirely overly-favorable.
The advent of the smartphone and touchscreen is essentially the defining characteristic of Web 2.0 and we haven't really approached Web 3.0+ in any meaningful way, in my experience. However, I am not a computer architecture/hw guru, yet I still expect the future to be pleasantly surprising despite this, erm, rather unnecessarily difficult time.
Yes, but I'd describe it more like Web 2.5 is basically the gross-weaponization of gossip as a glorified get-rich-quick pyramid scheme. There is little-to-no reason for this mode of thinking in 2024 and beyond, if we are to realize anything resembling actual human potential.
Until a more equitable society exists, we will likely not see a legitimate Web 3.0+, in my estimation.
Full disclosure: I'm a cusper Xillenial who thinks Elon Musk is an idiot and hopes he can find some actual value somewhere hidden in the depths of his colossal failures, plural.
To me, it seems the homeless may actually be a burden of society. Might widely-held definitions of "burden on society" be specious, at best? Like, I'm sure there's data that could convince many people they are right about what constitutes societal burden, but these are not necessarily people looking for answers; yes, these are people looking for problems, which is needed to an extent, but they are more likely simply confirming their own biases, which is not all that necessary.
My other answer is: I am seriously interested in current & future definitions of work and would like to hear from others working in software development, support, and/or analysis. I draw purposeful comparison to someone from the past who is vastly underrepresented in those areas out of curiosity & hope, thank you!
The first volume of TCP/IP Illustrated by Richard Stevens is wonderful. Ethernet frames, ARP, IP, ICMP, BOOTP, DHCP, UDP, TCP. Just make sure to get the original version.
Stevens' writing was engaging and pedagogically top shelf. Kevin Fall attempted integrating his coverage of newer protocols into the preexisting text, and unfortunately, completely butchered it.
Network chuck covers the basics. The only thing I would warn is that he only covers the extreme basics. Like the top 1% of networking. But he makes it sound like when you are done with his videos that you are ready to go make $250k as a network engineer.
So yes he's entertaining, but I only look at it as entertainment. The learning materials are barely more advanced than you can get from skimming an introductory blog post on networking.
Indeed. While I respect him, I don't like his caffeinated, manic presentation style and his material is far too basic for me. I suppose his presentation style is to hype up learners on an otherwise boring topic (for most, I personally love networking).
Nonetheless, he is quite popular with the early learners, such as OP.
