Categories For later read

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
I’m guessing these responses really reflect people’s weighted averages (age*current average effort fraction) though I kept it simple and asked for just averages.


I suspect a healthy weighted average should be ~ (age-20)/2. So a 30 year old should be at 5, a 40 year old at 10, a 50 year old at 15 etc.

Standard deviation should be ~average/3 maybe, so distribution spreads as you age and accumulate projects and get better at them.

Other things being equal, people get good at starting in their 20s, at follow through in 30s, at finishing in 40s.

No point learning food follow through until you’ve found a few good starts to bet on. No point getting good at finishing until a few projects have aged gracefully.

I’m in the 7+ range myself. Probably 8-9. Slightly less than healthy for my age.

I suspect most self-judgments on being good starters/follow-through-ers/finishers are really flawed because of the non-ergodicity of project management skill learning. You can’t learn good practices for the 3 phases in an arbitrary order. On,y one order actually works.
I’ve asked Byers to clarify, but as I read this tweet, it seems that Bret Stephens included an unredacted use of the n-word in his column this week to make a point, and the column got spiked—maybe as a result?


Four times. The column used the n-word (in the context of a quote) four times. https://t.co/14vPhQZktB


For context: In 2019, a Times reporter was reprimanded for several incidents of racial insensitivity on a trip with high school students, including one in which he used the n-word in a discussion of racial slurs.

That incident became public late last month, and late last week, after 150 Times employees complained about how it had been handled, the reporter in question resigned.

In the course of all that, the Times' executive editor said that the paper does not "tolerate racist language regardless of intent.” This was the quote that Bret Stephens was pushing back against in his column. (Which, again, was deep-sixed by the paper.)
Part of what is going on here is that large sectors of evangelicalism are poorly equipped to help people deal with basic struggles, let alone the ubiquitous pornography addictions that most of their men have been enslaved to for years.


On the one hand, there's a high standard of holiness. On the other hand, there's a model of growth that is basically "Try Harder to Mean it More." Identify the relevant scriptural truth & believe it with all of your sincerity so that you may access the Holy Spirit's help to obey.

Helping sincere believers believe and obey the Bible facts is pretty much all the Holy Spirit does these days, other than convict us of our sins in light of the Bible facts.

If you know you are sincere and hate your sin and believe the right Bible facts as hard as you can but continue to be enslaved to your pornography addiction, what else left for you to do? Just Really, Just Really, Just Really Trust God and Give it to Him?

To suggest that there are other strategies available sounds to those formed in this model of growth like one is also suggesting that the Bible is insufficient, but it also suggests something just as threatening- that there are aspects of reality that are not immediately apparent.
let's examine a particular magic trick: the way of memory.


giordano bruno was burned for having a good memory. socrates warned against writing things down since the power to write history is the power to direct a nation by deceit.

there is a tale of a man from Russia who had a perfect memory. perfect eidetic recall.

a buddy of mine always pointed out that you could always bring a random dot stereogram test to arbitrary precision until he flunked. the guy who passed would be a God.

due to its full taps of the Internet, the NSA can compare moment to moment data and figure out stuff like CIA media manipulation.
#IDTwitter #IDFellows
Introducing our new series: “IDFN top 10 articles every fellow should read”🔖

#1: SAB management
by @mmcclean1 @LeMiguelChavez
Reviewers @KaBourgi, @IgeGeorgeMD, @Courtcita, @MDdreamchaser

We know is subjective & expect feedback/future improvements 👇

1. Clinical management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a review.
https://t.co/9tBCtp9mlP
👉 A must read written by Holland et al. where they review the evidence of the management of SAB.

2. Impact of Infectious Disease Consultation on Quality of Care, Mortality, and Length of Stay in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Results From a Large Multicenter Cohort Study.
https://t.co/XujO68pCuH
👉ID consult associated with reduced inpatient mortality.

3. Predicting Risk of Endocarditis Using a Clinical Tool (PREDICT): Scoring System to Guide Use of Echocardiography in the Management of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia
https://t.co/otcA1pxjAw
👉Predictive risk factors for infective endocarditis, and thus the need for TEE.

4. The Cefazolin Inoculum Effect Is Associated With Increased Mortality in Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.
https://t.co/CQZiryVWZz
👉Presence of cefazolin inoculum effect in the infecting isolate was associated with an increase 30-day mortality.
The assertion & question of unity, unifying the country, wondering what the hell the problem is, and why is all this happening is taking center stage. Dramatically.
As is the corollary question being tossed about, "How to heal the Nation?".

There is a #systems principle


that is a powerful insight into these, & related, questions.

"You cannot solve a problem at the same level it was created."

If the problem we were solving for were some detail, 'where to place a road; what $ to allocate to this or that project' sort of thing, then the way to

think about the problem, the impasse, is to appeal first to the functions of prior planning, history - meaning what did we do the last time, maybe pragmatics...Eventually, if the organization (whether business, community, or governance) may make a decision and that becomes the

decision. Often, typically, the decision is some sort of amalgam of the various ideas and 'camps' in the room. Rarely, but sometimes, the decision is made out of pure hierarchy..."What the boss says goes, I don't care what you think..." sort of thing. Largely that is old school

and is not the normal way of conflict resolution. Especially in the context of solving a problem.
But a decision is made, and typically people, and the various factions, come together and get to work in the context of the decision. Sometimes called 'teamwork'.
The judge in this case has now issued an absolutely brutal smackdown that you'll enjoy reading. It comes complete with a well-earned threat of sanctions.


Here's the decision. Some highlights follow

Pretty sure I said this, using slightly different words!


Hey, @questauthority, it sounds like Judge Boasberg was about as pleased about the long "none of this matters but we want to say it anyway" section as we expected him to be


You CANNOT run into court claiming there's an emergency and you need an expedited schedule so you can be heard before 1/6 and then just not bother serving anyone for 12 days
It was December of 1992 and I was six, and "Aladdin" was in theaters. My sister and I weren't seeing it. My mother couldn't afford the tickets. I remember this because the three of us were sitting in the car and she cried + apologized for not being able to take us. (thread)


The strange thing is that I don't think I had even heard of "Aladdin" until she said anything. Maybe? I'm not sure. But I don't remember feeling like we were expecting to see it. I don't remember being disappointed. But to her, I think it felt like one more way she had failed us.

This was in the final year of her marriage to her second husband--our first "stepfather"--and there were reasons the three of us were in this car and not back at our place with him and his two kids. He was very abusive, and these car rides felt like a break.

So, we were sitting there in the car while she was contemplating how to get us out of this situation, but by now, it had become almost a weekly ritual, which was not lost on us, obviously. So, we're sitting there, and she starts crying and says the thing about "Aladdin".

And then, while crying, she says: "You've never been to the movies," which was true. My sister and I had not been to a movie theater up to that point in our short lives. I remember saying "that's okay", and my sister said the same and put her little hand on my mother's arm.
I’ve been frustrated by the tweets I’ve seen of this as a Canadian. Because the facts are being misrepresented.

We’re not under some sort of major persecution. That’s not what this is. A thread. 1/8


This church was fined for breaking health orders in Dec. They continued to break them. So the pastor was arrested and released on conditions of... you guessed it, not breaking health orders. And then they broke the health orders. 2/8

So then he was arrested and told he couldn’t hold church services in person if he was to be released. He refused. He’s still in custody.

Here is my frustration as a Christian in Canada:

1. They were able to gather, with some conditions. They didn’t like those. 3/8

2. He is not actually unable to preach. He is just unable to hold church services because they broke the conditions given by the public health office in Alberta. He says he can’t in good conscience do that, so they are keeping him in jail (because he will break the law). 4/8

3. This is the 1st article of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: “guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” 5/8
My thoughts on 1-dose vs 2-dose approach.

TL; DR

Wrong questions give you wrong answers.

We assuredly should want 2 doses, the only issue is the timing of 2nd dose. And a brief delay is a risk worth taking.

But let's prioritize >65 year old 2nd doses at same time.

1/9


First, let's start with @VirusesImmunity brilliant thread:

We know enough to know that there is vast benefit from giving substantial immunity to as many as possible as quickly as possible.


We also know that the timing of second dose was never set in stone. Pfizer chose to give second dose at 19-23 days; Moderna chose at 28-31 days. They tested at these levels and proved safety and efficacy. Safety is not at issue with delayed dosing. Efficacy probably is.

3/9

Most of medicine, as practiced, has not been subjected to rigorous clinical trials for various reasons. We weigh available evidence & act accordingly. We pivot when new evidence is available. We should want more RCTs, but they are often unethical or impossible to perform. 4/9

Ideally, Pfizer &/or Moderna would have already done a single dose arm. JNJ is testing both a single-dose & 2-dose regimen. We will have some data in a few weeks on the 1-dose regimen.

But we don't live in an ideal world. We live in the real world.
This is a good @mattyglesias post about techno-politics but I want to quibble with the part of it that’s about my essay on the policy feedback loops you can build by Just Helping People Fast. Matt writes: https://t.co/MuBlgQV6LW


Over at Mischiefs of Faction, @Smotus makes a similar point:
https://t.co/al6fS5tZXP


I want to be clear here: I’m saying that the Affordable Care act was, from a political perspective, badly designed, and that *a different health care plan* might’ve led to a better Dem performance in 2010. But these arguments don't grapple with that.

To @Smotus’s point, Pelosi released those House Democrats at the end, not the beginning. Having covered the beginning of this, I can tell you a lot of those Democrats thought a bipartisan health care bill would be great politics for them!

But they didn’t get that.

This is key. The ACA was built on the political theory that:

1. Bipartisan policy is easier to pass — and more popular once passed.

2. Working off of the Heritage Foundation/Romney template could get you a bipartisan health bill.

1 was probably right. 2 was utterly wrong.