All arguments for and against the existence of God are inherently unfalsifiable, but that doesn't mean atheism is inherently more logical than theism.
I'm guessing you're one of those people who thinks atheism means a belief in the absence of a god, rather than its actual meaning, which is an absence of a belief in a god.
"Writers disagree on how best to define and classify atheism, contesting what supernatural entities are considered gods, whether atheism is a philosophical position or merely the absence of one, and whether it requires a conscious, explicit rejection; however, the norm is to define atheism in terms of an explicit stance against theism." (emphasis mine)
I assume they mean they build their projects by typing in the terminal commands directly, not that they have vim rigged up to build stuff via keyboard shortcut. I don't think most people use their IDEs like a text editor with a built-in terminal.
In this survey study of US adults from 2000 to 2018, sexual inactivity increased among men aged 18 to 24 years and 25 to 34 years and women aged 25 to 34 years during the study period, with the increase among men mainly occurring among unmarried individuals. Men with lower income and with part-time or no employment were more likely to be sexually inactive, as were men and women who were students.
People who have fewer entertainment options have more sex. (I've seen it said that e.g. people living on small islands have lots of sex, which is part of how they remain populated even with so many people leaving). That doesn't mean that they're sexier - having lots of sex because you're bored is no more sexy than watching lots of porn. (You can look at swinger groups for the extreme example - they have a lot of sex but are profoundly unsexy to most people).
While these trends exist, they don't directly correlate with the invention of the smart phone or the behaviors the poster is stating are unsexy. It has more to do with social education, reduction of religion, and many other factors not discussed in their post.
These are just two results from a 30 second Google search. There is a ton of information out there that directly correlates both social media and immediate, ubiquitous access to it (i.e. smartphones) with negative social outcomes, including suicide rates.
Honestly "smartphone bad" is such a popular thing to publish and claim, and so directly contradictory to my own experience, that I don't credit it. It's like the D&D satanism panics or something.
"You just lack willpower". Yeah sure, like you demonstrate having any.
My adult, reasonably fit weight was about 175 - 180. I got up to 215 back in 2018. I'm now back down to 185 and getting leaner. You know what I noticed? My hunger pangs were far stronger when I was fatter.
When people ask about losing weight, I say "make friends with hunger". I'm hungry for a significant portion of the day these days. For a few years there, I wasn't hungry because I was always proactively eating, and when hunger did hit, it was intense.
So, this "hungry for a significant portion of the day", in the context of software development. Are you just supposed to throw in the towel on getting anything done, or write blublang with an endless stream of boilerplate, or what? Like I certainly get the experience of doing straightforward physical tasks and putting off eating, but it seems like a non-starter when you actually need to like, concentrate thoughtfully.
If anything, my concentration and energy level are more consistent while hungry.
I wake up hungry, but I'm not in a rush to get to breakfast. I start feeling hunger again within a couple of hours after a meal, but I'm still at least a couple of hours from the next one. I often fall asleep slightly hungry.
Intermittent fasting might be a good idea if this sounds alien. At least you'll only feel misery for part of the day.
I read an article years ago about how the French eat at set times and don't snack between meals, and they don't accommodate snacking behavior in children. That's not to say the French are necessarily some ideal, but certainly Americans are always snacking, on top of everything that's been said about processed foods and ease of access to food. I recall always hearing about "starvation mode" and how you were somehow going to gain weight if you ever dared to let yourself become hungry, and I foolishly believed it.
I’ve made friends with hunger, and it’s a weird head space. You begin to look forward to a good hunger the way you look forward to a good meal. Not any healthier than overeating in my estimation, and it puts you outside a lot of food oriented social interactions. Worth trying, if only to learn that mild hunger won’t kill you, but not a great lifestyle.
My concentration is consistently terrible while hungry, to the point that I might as well just consider the time gone instead of even trying to write code or really even think about much of anything. That's my experience.
So while I don't doubt your experience (and it's great that you've figured this out for yourself), it doesn't really generalize into advice about how anyone can simply change their perspective to avoid gaining weight.
Like I said, hunger pangs were far worse when I was fatter.
That said, there's a spectrum of hunger. Have you ever been hungry enough that you thought about eating your own dog? I haven't, but I've read enough stories of humans surviving terrible conditions to know that it happens.
As for concentration while hungry, that honestly sounds like either a psychological addiction or something physiological like blood sugar levels.
it doesn't really generalize into advice about how anyone can simply change their perspective to avoid gaining weight
when you observe management wasting absurd amounts of money
Working in corporate America has caused me to view layoffs as proof of managerial incompetence. I understand that the market doesn't see it that way, but that's the conclusion I've come to.
It's been my experience that accepting whatever dumb challenge management presents is how you get kept on. The advice that "your job is to make your manager look good to his manager" rings true to me. I would add that boosting your manager's ego goes pretty far, too. I find both activities detestable, but necessary in corporate life.
Always keep interviewing. One of the biggest mistakes I’ve seen is stopping interviews after starting a new job, trusting in the company.
I've never understood how people can muster the energy for this. I'm sure it's a great idea, but I would burn out immediately.
I'm not sure he clearly didn't want to mention it - he didn't state he didn't mention it on purpose. I'm sure many people wondered, and going on LinkedIn is trivial. Had it not been on LinkedIn I wouldn't have looked further. If he didn't want to be outed, he could take Shopify off of Linkedin.
Given the acts of brutality committed by the VC against those who didn't willingly join their cause, I wouldn't have stuck around with my family, either. One example from, as I recall, early in the division was burning alive the mayor of a village that refused to adopt communism. These things never get talked about and the only reason I've even heard of this was from listening to an interview on Dan Carlin's Hardcore History Addendum podcast.
> I wouldn't have stuck around with my family, either
Which is a major plot point of stories like Handmaid's Tale where you get caught in a civil war with opposing views of the territory you're in when it starts. You didn't start the war, but now you're an enemy for just living in your home. Do you just give up your beliefs or do you try to get out of there?
the US literally industrialized the process of burning alive people in vietnam who didn’t support the colonial government. would love a source on the mayor claim
You're a perfect example of why reporting about Vietnam was horribly broken. We all know about the atrocities committed by the Americans, but nobody understands how horrendous the VC were, and the direct threat they presented to those conquered.
I've already given you the source for the mayor story, but you're not actually interested in it, are you? You'll stay blissfully ignorant with false plausible deniability.
do you have a source that’s written aka not a podcast? googling the mayor burning claim just brings me to your comment
even just a transcript of the episode you’re discussing. generally i find if someone responds with ire rather than a link, the event usually did not happen as they remembered it
Wikipedia has an article, with links to sources. I think the main source is Douglas Pike's The Vietcong Strategy of Terror[0]. Another Vietnam Expert, Bernard Fall, documents some of it in Vietnam Witness.
there is no mention of this 'mayor burning alive' story in either of these sources. nor do i really trust this book, written during the vietnam war, while the US propaganda efforts were mounting up.
I like it, and I laughed out loud when Clippy popped up. That bastard came out when my college ran everything from slow network drives. He'd bring the system to a grinding halt, unless you were on one of the few workstations with a local hard drive.
I'm guessing you're one of those people who thinks atheism means a belief in the absence of a god, rather than its actual meaning, which is an absence of a belief in a god.
reply