It's quite sad that ADHD is as stigmatized as it is: even though it is a very well-characterized condition in psychiatric literature, the most common 'pop-science' take one hears about it is that ADHD is completely overdiagnosed and may not even exist as a condition. Also, I know multiple people, even though well-managed ADHD would not negatively affect their careers, are barred from certain professions (like high-security military careers and being pilots) simply due to having ADHD and being medicated for it.
I suppose well-managed drug abuse would not negatively affect their careers either, but I think it's a good thing you can't become a pilot or similar with certain conditions.
| The main challenge in building content-aware memory models is lack of data. To my knowledge, no publicly available dataset exists that contains real-world usage data with both card textual content and review histories.
I wonder if the author has ever considered reaching out to makers of Anki decks used by premeds and medical students like the AnKing [1]. They create Anki decks for users studying the MCAT and various Med School curricula, so have a) relatively stable deck content (which is very well annotated and contains lots of key words that would make semantic grouping quite easy) b) probably contains loads of statistics on user reviews (since they have an Anki addon that sends telemetry to their team to make the decks better IIRC), and c) contains incredibly disparate information (all the way from high-school physics to neurochemistry).
What sort of privacy implications? I'd imagine that Anki data would be relatively privacy-concern free, as it contains no PII, and for the AnKing decks, all of the content is standardized and so wouldn't contain personal notes. Though, having never worked with this data, please let me know if I'm wrong!
Also, having used those decks in the past, and downloaded the add-on/look at the monetization structure of developers like the AnKing, I would be very surprised if aggregate data on review statistics wasn't collected in some way. I.e., if the AnKing is collecting this data already to design better decks/understand which cards are the hardest—probably to target individual support—then I imagine that collecting some de-anonymized version of that data wouldn't be too much of a stretch.
Plus, considering that all of the developers of AnKing-style decks are all doctors, they probably have a pretty good grasp at handling PII and could (hopefully) make pretty sound decisions on whether to give you access :)
You're right, it might work by restricting to just AnKing data. My concern was around other, possibly personal, cards making their way into the dataset.
This was one of the most incredible essays about war I've ever read. At some points I forgot that I was even reading an essay about war, but everything came together in the end.
I think Sandlin was one of the few authors (perhaps alongside Remarque) that could adequately capture the silent resignation into fear (or 'fey' as he put it) that so many people have; my father was one of those people, and while his time at war was something I barely understand and was never told about—probably to shield me—his description of those restless nights dreaming of patrolling Okinawa (or Fallujah, Kandahar, or Kashmir) are something that truely can't be described by the language of peace, or even by people who were not there—like myself.
There's a certain melancholy in the tone of the entire essay, something that I think grips so many people in my generation (and that Sandlin mentions while describing Wagner): the belief that while life continues on as normal today, the world is about to be irreparably changed for the worse; perhaps we'll go to war with China, Russia, Iran, or some other country, but in the aftermath, everything we've taken for granted in life will be completely gone. I think an entire generation of young men now believe that they'll eventually be shipped off to some war and might not return—and if they do, just like Eugene Sledge, the entire world around them will be completely different. And eventually, no one will care to hear about their war stories and their memories of it will fade.
> I think an entire generation of young men now believe that they'll eventually be shipped off to some war and might not return
Things are pretty grim for me, and I think I'm undraftable.
If I stay in the US, what if I get targeted by stochastic terrorism for my identity or my beliefs or my speech?
If I leave the US, what if I regret leaving my friends and family? What if they suffer and I could have prevented it?
If I leave the US and everything is fine, and it's just an embarrassing waste of time and money, then what?
If the US falls into civil war... If Russia advances farther into Europe and China moves for Taiwan and the US goes into war mode to project power, even though Trump dithers between siding with Russia and against.
I don't think I'm overreacting. The government is being disassembled day by day as good people resign and corrupt loyalists are hired in. The tipped scales of the Electoral College, the Senate, the mis-allocated House, and the "apolitical" legislature of the Supreme Court are all finally aligned with a well-organized wanna-be fascist regime. The hopes for sanity are that the Republican party might infight long enough to run out of steam, and that the US might be so big and defensible that even the US could not invade the US, especially if an organized defense were mounted.
You know, a year ago, I had dreams. I was going to get cosmetic surgery and buy a new car just because I wanted one, and I was going to take up expensive hobbies and do some self-care and really enjoy myself. Right-wing pundits want me dead or imprisoned and I just want to be left alone.
Not to compare it to the horror of seeing your buddies explode into bloody chunks, but I feel like I'm living in a bit of a cold war.
I don't see the point having a full-time career or putting money into my retirement fund when I might not be in the US in 2028, or I might not be alive, or I might need a huge sum of cash to save myself and some loved ones.
And I have to keep telling myself, I'm not overreacting. A friend of a friend was kidnapped across state lines by ICE this week, kept for days with no contact with their family, and probably will never get justice. That is terrorism. Committed by a government elected by a 30% majority of American voters, against people who look different or pose a threat to their order. None of my friends have faith that the Democratic Party, which peacefully ceded power to a man who wants to be king, will put up a serious fight. I think as an atheist, I never appreciated how much faith it takes, even secular faith, to live day-by-day. My friends condemn "civil religion" while I only long to believe again. We never deserved the Statue of Liberty and we sure aren't earning it now.
I hope someone takes this seriously. If anyone reading understands this, the Republican Party is mounting a 51% attack on America. It is the same problem that can happen to cryptocurrency, because in the end democracy only works is power is distributed. Please please vote Democrat next year, if there are elections. Please stand up to ICE. Please say "No, you can't kidnap people and hold them without trial just because you decided they're suddenly illegal." We used to at least pretend to have standards.
While I do agree with a lot of what you're saying (wrt. people in the US feeling that their country is slowly falling apart, perhaps into fascism) I just wanted to point out that I don't actually live in the US.
Though I think the nascent feelings you describe are very universal: living in a (thankfully) stable democracy, I think these feelings that the world is slowly unraveling are quite universal—we constantly see in the news that the U.S. is slowly falling apart, that there are now large-scale land wars in Europe again, and that China is inching towards a crisis in the Taiwan Strait. I think for a lot of people it feels hard to imagine a world that gets better in the short-medium term, especially as the U.S. slowly starts to unravel itself (from an outsider POV).
I'm not really sure whether the world is slowly starting to become more crazy or whether this has always been the case (I wasn't even a teenager when Trump was first elected), I sometimes wonder if the feeling that things are reaching a breaking point is the same feeling that people had in 1928.
I completely agree—though it would be very difficult to measure the information contained within methylation/acetylation. If, naively, we assume that epigenetic modifications act only to increase or decrease the rate of transcription (or promoter binding, nucleosome coverage, and/or things we barely even understand as of now), and also assume that only cytosine bases are modified, then we still increase our estimate for the amount of information by at least an order of magnitude—and this neglects other modifications like methylation on nucleosomes, of which there are hundreds.
Maybe it's regression to the mean? Perhaps the second day 'feels' more lazy because you did so much the last day, so that when you return to your baseline, you feel as if you haven't done anything in comparison.
This could be proven/disproven with some metrics about your average productivity and productivity on 'lazy' days.
Just curious: does anyone know any good, somewhat realistic computer wargames that one could play? I've always been interested in military theory, history, and strategy, so would love to play a wargame where you play as a commander and have to deal with limited intelligence while moving forces around, engaging with an enemy, and (most importantly) dealing with logistics. Paradox games scratch this itch a bit, but I find that they emphasize the "grand" strategy a bit too heavily.
If this doesn't exist: why not? It seems like the Army should spend millions of dollars to give their officers a fun way to get tactical and logistical experience without having to run in-person wargames.
I guess from a genetic standpoint, it doesn't really matter. Since many of those near-relations (as other comments have mentioned) who mated and had children would have somewhat similar genetic profiles, one particular SNP from a great-x10 grandparent might still propagate to us, simply because other mates would also have that gene.
I wonder if there's religious symbolism attached to this, i.e., I wonder if people in the HRE made an allusion between the trinity you mentioned and that of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
No, three is just an arbitrary number for their example. The point is not the exact number of roles but the fact that the basic legal unit is the relationship, not the person. For instance a prince-bishop might in principle be subject to an archbishop as a bishop, subject to the Emperor as an imperial prince, subject to the King of Bohemia (who was in turn subject to the Emperor) as the holder of a secular fief, and part of the Polish nobility, all at once.
yes this is true today - some researchers have identified the LEGAL definition of a person taking over from the biological definition of a person, in modern times. If you consider the realms of finance, things are definitely not consistent nor fully resolved.
Yeah, in retrospect I realized the three might be distracting but it was just the example I thought of at the moment. (It gets even worse if the guy also has burgher status in a free city!)
