B.c in modern society people don't eat enough whole foods, get good sleep b.c of alcohol and other over stimulation, not enough outdoors/consistent movements/exercise, have to be saddled with too much stress etc and end up slowly killing themselves (in unnatural ways) without realizing or potentially caring
He worked 4 nightshifts in A&E in UK, and he tabulated the 120 patients. He thought that most middle-aged patients with heart problems were only there due to their lifestyle choices in the previous decade(s).
He tried to argue that if we had more preventative/proactive health decisions then A&E wouldn't be overrun with sick people. He implied they should be the dying of old age instead.
He said they failed to save an 8 year old girl who ate a button cell, because the department was overrun with people with acute emergency issues due to lifestyle. She died after arrival (he talked about how the electricity can cause fatal damages).
I didn't find his conclusions made sense to me, but I still felt the video was worthwhile watching (especially if you are middle aged like me).
I think the most interesting point was that there are no (or very few) rules specific to each prize and that's it's mostly up to the idiosyncrasies of the unique small group of people who are part of the panel. So the prestige of a specific book prize is really superstition. It makes sense rationally, outside of having the same group of people judge the same book prize every year (and then they'd have to live forever?) there's no real way to keep consistent. And their tastes would I assume change from year to year. The other way would be to have a sort of constitution or set of rules, but that would be interpreted differently by each group.
I wonder if we'll have AI-judged book prizes in order to keep them more "value-free", you could have a group of authors write down a prompt file and then the AI could read hundreds of books in a day. But then there would be the implicit biases of the AI and I suppose most high-brow authors and readers would despise those particular biases.
Actually it might do you good to speak to a scientist. You seem to be confusing different species of birds with different races of humans; we are all one species, and a fairly closely-related species as far as mammals go[0]
You notion of "species are OK to be aware of differences, but races are not" - is flawed. Species and races are just two levels of hierarchy which has several such levels of distinction and evolution branching across flora and fauna. There are further levels of branching below the "race" level too, the evolution of which is defined by the differences. It is a continuous spectrum. You can't single out two levels somewhere in the middle and assign some arbitrary and inconsistent rules.
You should just be honest with yourself and others that you're a racist, instead of hiding behind flawed pseudoscience interpretations.
You're the one picking arbitrary social distinctions and pretending they're immutable natural ones. Why is race mixing different from hair colour or religious mixing?
> Why is race mixing different from hair colour or religious mixing?
Because evolutionary distinctions are indicators for the norms and actions of the species. Why would you treat a shark differently from a salmon? Because you acquired knowledge about them. The whole point of evolutionary perception and survival instincts was to perceive and decode these indicators.
People and animals grow up in different cultural contexts and with different norms and values. What's OK for others may not be OK for you. Some of these differences are not purely psychological that can be erased by having common rules. For example, some races are good at some sports. Do you complain if a sports team is 100% one kind of race?
All races are good and I'm a big fan of so much variety in nature. But please don't erase that rich variety with your common rules.
So how long until this is enshittified and how will it go? Will people ask for cars to be faster so they will take riskier decisions? Will a cheaper company with a worse training model capture the most market share? Pilot products are usually great, but that rarely lasts into their profitable period.
Arenko (energy transition/batteries and renewables) | London, UK | 2x/week in office
We work on industrial/grid-scale batteries and other renewable generation: monitoring, managing and trading them on multiple energy markets. Batteries like these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_energy_storage_system Everyone starting from the C-suite is passionate about addressing climate change and transitioning to renewable energy!
We're a small team of 7 backend engineers atm (other teams have Ops, FE and DS roles). We have paying customers and have been around for 10 years. Our current goal is to make the platform more scalable to deal with the customer growth and move to new markets. The biggest challenge is understanding how the various energy markets and energy storage in general work and then translating that to reliable working software.
We're currently looking for a few Senior Backend Engineers (Go), a Senior Data Engineer and a Senior Infrastructure Engineer. Our office is in London Blackfriars and most engineers come in about 2 days a week, but this is flexible.
Feel free to message me with any questions or apply directly:
