Not in any way, no. Our brains can’t predict what we will be interested in or good at.

But we do have predispositions. If you are able to focus intently on things, or are creative, or are more athletic, which are reflected in neuronal connectivity, you might be more interested in more detail-oriented or creative or athletic hobbies.

They’ll get the picture in the fine letter so make sure you give them your best one-finger salute

Yep, the lockdown waves probably weren’t ideal for preventing viral spread, but we now know they were at least better than doing nothing.

Hopefully we learn for next time

As always, it’s better to recommend more strict restrictions when you don’t know if they’re effective and there’s an impact on public health. Hindsight is 20/20

I wish I was a better piano player

I’m a competent musician in many instruments but I could never get the hang of using my left hand for accompaniment

The lady wielding the wheat stalk has three hands

Very cool! Does this use LLMs at all, or is it more traditional programming?

From someone with a science background: There are a lot of expenses with that type of clinical trial.

In particular, if you’re going to assign someone to a group that is known to be unhealthy (brushing once a month) you need to pay for any dental or medical problems that arise from them not brushing.

It would be a problem if he was brought on to talk about COVID being a hoax. It’s not really a problem if he’s talking about something entirely different and not problematic

Just from reading the title I was expecting a seasonal pumpkin spice WD40 joke

But this is also acceptable

Probably not. Just make a new account and fly under the radar for a while. If you keep getting banned on different accounts they will IP ban you.

Technically it’s against the rules to make a new account to avoid a ban, but like I said, they probably won’t look into it unless you give them a reason to

Not to mention all of the other chemicals!

Literally every ingredient! Chemicals!

Definitely better than this outdated version. Nobody uses Python2 unless they want to at this point

I think the problem is that a lot of shows become overhyped once they reach a certain level of popularity. While you may have enjoyed it if you came across it naturally, the hype you’ve encountered around it makes you expect more. Avatar and Parks and Rec are great shows, but they’re definitely not the best shows of all time (although I do really love Parks and Rec) and you’d probably expect them to be these amazing shows if all you know about them is the hype from superfans.

Two cuties*

Always get cats in pairs. They tire themselves out instead of constantly needing attention from you

Wow a large circular stuffed animal

Yes. Capitalism is king. It doesn’t need a reason other than to feed itself more profit

Always good to recognize that while there are many things most people should realize by the time they are adults, there are also about 10,000 people becoming adults every day.

Thanks for the information. Each of these are indeed troubling. But I think it’s disingenuous to say “science” is at fault for these. Shitty people doing shitty things for their own shitty reasons seems to be at play. Some of those reasons are for scientific funding or clout, but I think I comfortably speak for a lot of scientists when I say the scientific output is not worth it.

I think we’re mainly on the same page with a lot of this, we just have different descriptions of who we think the bad guy is. My view is that humans have the capacity for great evil, especially when motivated by profit or fame, but that science itself isn’t the root cause of this evil but is instead a catalyst enabling people to become famous as a result of it. It’s the fame, in my opinion, that drives people to do these terrible things. Science itself doesn’t really benefit, and is arguably hurt, by these actions, since there are likely other less harmful ways to research these topics.

Of course, I am biased. I have a career in science, after all. But I do genuinely believe that science does not require these terrible actions to thrive.

K