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.
It's an approach that's very hard for a lot of people and some people would say it's pathological. I don't believe it is because it clearly works for him and the alternative was far worse. He'll tell you that as well.
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.
He's very open about the fact that he listens to negative comments from social media in his headphones when he when he runs. He's talked about that. He tells himself what a piece of garbage he is if he doesn't do this. I mean he he basically flagagillates himself into into doing these things.