Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if your life depended on it, The Inner Game of Tennis, Miss Lily's Lovely Ladies, The Tattooist of Auschwitz, All the Light You Cannot See, Dark Emu, Nanberry: Black Brother White, Girt: The Unauthorized History of Australia, To Pixar and Beyond, The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up.
to-read
“If it’s milk versus soda, I would pick milk. If it’s milk versus water, I’d pick water.”
And if it's water versus beer, I would pick beer. :D
“If I’m not telling you exactly what I think, then I may develop a twitch or an illness from not expunging my feelings.” To which I would say, “No, you’re not. You’re preserving the peace and good nature of the republic, and it’s absolutely what you should be doing.”
This is an itch you need to scratch. Expressing yourself feels so good, even at the expense of others. Keeping your itch to yourself and trying to accommodate another person's wellness is a real struggle.
Love is doing that work to ask oneself, “Where’s this rather aggressive, pained, noncommunicative, unpleasant behavior come from?”
Trying to walk on other person's shoes, even if it for a random person on the street, is quite a humbling experience. You try to look at things from their perspective, which you will never be able to do fully, yet you try. That is the definition of empathy. You are treating the other person as your own equal, not only your SO but your friends and family; and sometimes colleagues and strangers. Preferably more often, but even sometimes is enough most of the time.
we castigate ourselves for not having a normal love life, even though no one seems to have any of these
If everyone is having the same imperfect life, isn't that the new normal? Or maybe that's how it is ought to be—Everyone living their imperfect life with snowflake uniqueness.
The Darkest Truth About Love.
Work or study long hours
Will I ever be able to do this?
On the third Sunday after Snowball's expulsion, the animals were somewhat surprised to hear Napoleon announce that the windmill was to be built after all. He did not give any reason for having changed his mind, but merely warned the animals that this extra task would mean very hard work, it might even be necessary to reduce their rations. The plans, however, had all been prepared, down to the last detail. A special committee of pigs had been at work upon them for the past three weeks. The building of the windmill, with various other improvements, was expected to take two years.
Quite a surprise. Deny it at first, accept it later. If it succeeds, you take the credit, if it fails, the blame lies on original thinker. Politician's bait?
“A parliamentarian just asked me who said Nepalis have greater immunity powers,” said Oli. “Could you not hear me? I said it, just a while ago.”
This is a facepalm moment for me. I've never felt more embarrassed in my life.
Human beings have a need (probably based in bio-logy) for something that we will call thepower process.This is closely related to the need for power (which iswidely recognized) but is not quite the same thing.
I will need some data and criticism from well-informed critics. Please let me know when you come accross this.
Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics.Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, theyintentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc.These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists usethem not as a means to an end but because they PREFERmasochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
Facepalm.
Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason,science, objective reality and to insist that everything isculturally relative.
Are you sure you aren't talking about yourself?
Leftists tend to hate anything that has an imageof being strong, good and successful. They hate America,they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, theyhate rationality
Too broad of a blanket statement? But then what else here isn't?
(We do not mean to suggestthat women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only ma-king a point about leftist psychology.)
Are they trying to be politically correct while bashing political correctness.
The negative connotations have been attachedto these terms by the activists themselves
Citation needed.
They may even have NO personal qualities that contribute to their effectiveness: they may just happen to know one useful thing by accident. Would you give up a treasure-hunting expedition simply because the person who has the map is a happy-go-lucky drunk who happened to find it in a dumpster by accident while looking for food? Judge people by what they can do, not who they are. As Forrest Gump told Bubba's family, "stupid is, as stupid does."
Fresh perspective but not sold yet.
This books explains the foundational theories of economics and presents many compelling cases but is merely theoretical in nature and is biased towards ideological purity.
This is a solution to the economic system that is perfectly spherical and is isolated in perfect vacuum and the book does not even acknowledge these assumptions at all. There is no socio-political analysis, no environmental analysis nor acknowledgement. The book does not want to acknowledge the fact that economic systems are for the humans, not the other way round. Couldn't finish even half the book and had to skim through the rest.
In the pin-making industry there was already, if machines merely throw men out of jobs, 99.98 per cent unemployment.
Isn't it only visible on hindsight? Or shall we say that every industry is inefficient and hence 99% of the workers redundant.
This is only another way of saying that the government lenders will take risks with other people’s money (the taxpayers’) that private lenders will not take with their own money.
The senator is investing for his next election? Short termism is a real problem.
Now as a matter of fact this is what happens every day under the institution of private credit. If a man wishes to buy a farm, and has, let us say, only half or a third as much money as the farm costs, a neighbor or a savings bank will lend him the rest in the form of a mortgage on the farm. If he wishes to buy a tractor, the tractor company itself, or a finance company, will allow him to buy it for one-third of the purchase price with the rest to be paid off in installments out of earnings that the tractor itself will help to provide.
I agree.
In the eyes of most Congressmen the farmers simply cannot get enough credit.
Maybe, we will all starve and die if there is not enough production but won't affect much if there is less production of YouTube videos. Private opinion and I digress.
The government spenders forget that they are taking the money from A in order to pay it to B.
This seems to be the main point, as I understand up to this point. Why should I, one who worked too hard and all that money, be spending my earnings for the development of other section. Major bias seems to be that I live in isolation and they didn't and don't have any effect on my current state and will not ever in the future.
Other sections of the country, we should remember, are then comparatively poorer.
One section of the country is comparatively richer itself is a problem. I do not advocate for all homogeneous society but there is a baseline and everyone should be above that baseline, even at the economic expense of the rich.
Under such circumstances it is highly improbable that the projects thought up by the bureaucrats will provide the same net addition to wealth and welfare, per dollar expended, as would have been provided by the taxpayers themselves, if they had been individually permitted to buy or have made what they themselves wanted, instead of being forced to surrender part of their earnings to the state.
Until now, all I can understand is not about various aspects of economics but private vs public property.
While I'm biased more towards that a large public organization is less efficient due to various socio-political reasons but I think it is merely implementation problem rather than theoretical one. Theoretically, I don't see any disadvantage in any ideology in best case scenarios. For worst case scenarios, I'm not decided yet.
I do not intend to enter here into all the pros and cons of public housing. I am concerned only to point out the error in two of the arguments most frequently put forward in favor of public housing. One is the argument that it “creates employment”; the other that it creates wealth which would not otherwise have been produced. Both of these arguments are false, because they overlook what is lost through taxation. Taxation for public housing destroys as many jobs in other lines as it creates in housing. It also results in unbuilt private homes, in unmade washing machines and refrigerators, and in lack of innumerable other commodities and services.
Even if I agree with the sentiment here, the argument does not acknowledge about the true necessity of providing housing, a basic rights, to the underprivileged. Even if it is economically false, it can be a necessity sometimes. Yeah, I agree that they can be subsidized financially and leave the burden of building houses to private sector but that's besides point.
Every citizen will have access to education and health care.
Egalitarianism is something I am attracted to but rest of the points are not really advantages but the side effects.
It gives the government much if not full control.
I think it wil shift the public from economic struggle to power struggle instead.
People have to deal with bureaucracy.
If it is not properly optimized, which is a big if, it is non ideal.
It can result to unnecessary spending by the government.
This seems to be problem in both capitalism as well as socialism.
It can result to lack of motivation.
It might give rise to collaboration and cooperation like most of today's scientific endeavours.
The rights of workers might be too much.
Not an issue.
Nothing could be worse than a return to normality.
World can't return to normal. It has to change, mold itself. During this molding, all the people should participate. There is a danger that only a few will mold a new world for us and we will create another, yet equally dangerous, doomsday scenario for ourselves.
The Covid crisis is still to come. Or not. We don’t know. If and when it does, we can be sure it will be dealt with, with all the prevailing prejudices of religion, caste and class completely in place.
Even in the time of utmost need, these structures will still remain to benefit the one who had already been benefited? Maybe, we need to wait long enough for the structures to fall. Perhaps so long that no one of those who are being oppressed lives?
As they walked, some were beaten brutally and humiliated by the police, who were charged with strictly enforcing the curfew. Young men were made to crouch and frog jump down the highway. Outside the town of Bareilly, one group was herded together and hosed down with chemical spray.
Lack of proper planning, abrupt treatment and then inhumane methods to enforce the treatment.
The film starts with a politician giving a speech who dies soon after a helicopter crash. His son Dev grows up and is living a lavish lifestyle and is a drug addict. He owes crores and crores of money to financers. They kidnap him and when his girlfriend calls one of their well wishers he is rescued. Then his uncle suffers a heart stroke and then Dev returns to claim his father's legacy.
One of the shortest plot summary that I find it funny.
You don't have to believe China. We have Italy as a proof and there is no reason to believe otherwise. While there is possibility that the actual cases is higher than reported cases, we don't have to entertain conspiracy theory to see that there can be a reasonable margin of error.
Dixit notes that the hypothesis has not been tested for virus outbreaks.
Then why mention it now and again.
Instead, Dixit counsels trying to identify the 10-15% of the population most at risk, suggesting that people might have been hospitalised and mistakenly diagnosed with Influenza A when they actually have COVID-19.
Many people are scared and don't visit doctors, most of the time believing they don't have it or they have immunity against it. You know, "नेपाली ले पायो भने गर्छ।". Door to door visit is must, may it be by local representatives or via social media.
I think it is foolhardy to think that we are somehow immune – there is no scientific basis for this. I think it is a silly, wild conjecture.
It is necessary to have a healthy immune system but believing we already have immunity is fooling oneself. Many seem to be in this belief.
Developing countries like Nepal have a limited number of tests. It is very hard to justify testing among the 80-85% of people who could develop mild symptoms — how would we find them anyway? You’d basically have to go door-to-door and how practical is that … we basically need to save lives. Screw the detective work.”
While I agree with the sentiment, there is an impediment of most people being fearful and not visiting doctors. Even more, most people falsely believe this "germ theory" hypothesis and then stay at home thinking what they have is "just flu".
We need to visit door-to-door to identify high risk people and urge them to visit doctors and try to reduce their misinformation and fear.
Listing various myths and truths about them would be more useful than this article.
यी तथ्यहरूलाई विश्लेषण गर्दा अहिलेसम्म नेपाल यो महामारीबाट कम प्रभावित हुनुमा हाम्रो खानपान, संस्कृति, पर्यावरण र रोग प्रतिरोधात्मक क्षमता राम्रो भएको वा अन्य केही कारणहरू हुनसक्छन्, जसको भोलिका दिनमा खोज अनुसन्धान हुने नै छ ।
संस्कृति सँग के संवन्ध?
We are built to last.
We might be built to last but not any one of us is. When you are talking about the population, 98% is going to survive at current rate which is poised to improve. But speaking personally, your old parents and grand parents, that diseased friend who has very low immunity, your partner who has diabetes, your friends spouse who is actually suffering from another disease and has weak immunity at the meantime is likely to die. But yeah, we are built to last.
Our bodies have one of the toughest immune systems in the world.
Body does not build immunity against unknown foreign objects. SARS-nCov-2 is that virus and your immunity against everything else is no more helpful. It is like fighting aliens with pistols.
So what are we panicking about?
While panic is bad, being complacent and confident is not any good. Ever heard of exponential growth?
कोरोनाभन्दा गम्भीर करप्सन भाइरस
Comparing apples to oranges?
अनुहार कालो वर्णको । कतिपय ठाउँमा म अनुहारले पनि विभेदीकरणमा परेकी छु ।
कालो वर्णको कारण अन्जान व्यक्तिहरूबाट मैले पनि सामान्य विभेदीकरणको भान महसुस गर्छु। तर त्यसले मलाई कुनै प्रतक्ष हानी गरेको पाएको छैन।
I think all the lessons here might be useful to many people some of the times but they seem to be cherry picked and do not provide a general guidelines out of given context. Read with caution.
Investing when odds favor: So invest when odds favor you.
To add context here, he put all his basket in the same bucket and was really going for all or nothing when he was confident about his hand. Wish we could play by such simple rules in life.
After all if you do not spend money for some luxuries otherwise what is the use of saving so much money?
Maybe there is better use of that money? No? Think for yourself.
The brown line near the bottom: that’s our limited supply of ventilators and intensive care beds!
Quite disturbing image even for America. I'm not sure if I'm going to see next year if Covid19 breaks in Nepal.
Unfortunately, we do not know how long this immunity lasts. We already observe multiple strain of COVID-19, and will see many more, due to the large number of carriers.
Another problem is, there is no guarantee that we will actually get out of it healthy if we survive. It could cripple us for the rest of our life in many ways unimaginable at the moment.
They mean to tell you that we can get away without severe lockdowns as we are currently observing them in China and Italy. Instead, we let the infection burn through the entire population, until we have herd immunity (at 40% to 70%), and just space out the infections over a longer timespan.
What I think is flattening the curve is helpful but not a solution in itself. It's always better to be protected.
लुम्बिनी राष्ट्रिय भेलाको भावना र पछिल्लो केन्द्रीय समिति बैठकको यो स्पष्टीकरणको मर्मलाई आमजनताकाबीच पुऱ्याउन सबै सदस्य र शुभचिन्तकहरूमा साझा पार्टी हार्दिक आह्वान गर्दछ।
I see that Sajha is not any better. Hence it has stooped so low and resorted to such populist method of making a comeback. I had much hope from Sajha and Bibekshil both. I'm not sure about Sajha anymore.
धर्म निरपेक्षताका विभिन्न विकल्प हुन सक्छन्
जनमतमा गई अल्प सन्ख्यकको प्रतिनिधित्व बचाई देखाउनु होस्।
धर्म निरपेक्षता र संघीयताको विषयमा आम नागरिकहरूमा भुसको आगो झैँ असन्तुष्टि फैलिरहेको छ
धर्म निरपेक्षता र संघीयताको विषयमा आम नागरिकहरूमा दुईचारजनाले भुसको आगो झैँ असन्तुष्टि फैलाईरहेका छन्।
FTFY
अब उप्रान्त धर्म निरपेक्षता र संघीयताका सवालमा जनमत संग्रहको पक्षमा उभिनेछ’
Trying to bring populist agenda in order to grab some power in next election?
जनमत संग्रह केवल एक लोकतान्त्रिक प्रक्रियाको मागमात्र होइन
Democracy is more about power decentralization, proportional participation of all the communities and ensuring the rights of the minorities than it is about the ego fulfilling of the majority.
केन्द्रीकृत राज्य प्रणालीबाट उच्च तहको विकेन्द्रिकरण
You mean another system which has not been tested yet, just because you want to name it.
यी दुई विषयमा हालको संवैधानिक व्यवस्था सफल नभएको भन्ने साझा पार्टीको निचोड हो। त्यसको विकल्प के हुन सक्छ भन्ने, जनमत संग्रहमा सोधिने प्रश्नले निर्क्यौल गर्ने विषय हो।
जे भएपनि आफू सत्तामा पुग्नु पर्यो।
परम्परागतरूपमा नेपाली समाजमा रहिआएको धार्मिक सद्भाव र सहिष्णुतालाई पुन:स्थापित गर्नु नितान्त जरूरी देखिन्छ।
बिग्रियो कसरी? कसले बिगार्यो? अनि किन बिगार्दै छ?
बहुसंख्यक नागरिकहरूमा पुग्न गएको चोट
कस्तो चोट?
In Go, I usually I start a debugger once a week because I need to understand the cause of a bug or panic. I have no idea how to debug Rust, because in 2 years of Rust, I haven't had that type of low level bug.
This was selected Quote of the week in Rust Newsletter.
a bit of monkey brain can make you smarter.
Seriously?
In the workplace too, a step in the wrong direction can provoke a superior and ruin a career, so that sometimes it’s wisest to do nothing at all.
Specially in a traditional hierarchical workplace.
If he went to the beach because he wanted the sunlight and the fresh air and the warm feeling of personally contributing to something, that's fine. If he actually wanted to help people by beautifying the beach, he's chosen an objectively wrong way to go about it.
This seems so counter-intuitive yet perfectly valid.
People commit altruistic acts, and then act selfishly and inconsiderately later in the day,
There is an episode called Moral Licensing in Mind Field which talks about this issue in more detail. Had great change of view when I first saw it.