The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Well, I very actively don't know how to make use of anything [laughs] with social media. So I guess that counts as my having thus actively chosen not to learn how. So that's the case certainly for the last year and a half, like lots of people, I've gone through stretches where I've managed to sort of enforce a moratorium on looking at the news, and that was wonderfully freeing.
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'd sort of spent decades spending part of each year studying wild baboons out in a national park in East Africa. And I'd spend three months a year without electricity, without phone calls, with going 12 hours a day without saying a word to somebody. And when I finally would, it would be somebody nomadic pastoralist guy in a different language. Yeah, I did 90% of my like insightful thinking about anything in the laboratory during those three months each year, and not one in the lab, and not when inundated with stuff.