The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
the point was like how could you expect this person to go back to the same place that they were living in the same environment with all of the same people doing the same things and say well you just got to resist it it doesn't make sense right
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I don't think you can go back to the same place you live like I think you need new friends now
you may need to like kind of take it in different stages and break it down to a more a degree where it's easier to have a line of attack
What has changed is our understanding of how much influence we can have over those cues and rewards by influencing our environment.
all Q's fall into one of five categories. It's a time of day, a particular place or environment, it's a certain emotion you feel, it's the presence of certain other people, or it's a preceding behavior that's become ritualized.