The potential benefits of alcohol are hard to decipher because of the population data:
“A lot of people who don’t currently drink are people who used to drink heavily, or who have health problems that led them to quit...” said Keith Humphreys, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and the Esther Ting Memorial Professor. “That skews the data, making moderate drinkers look healthier by comparison.”
I wouldn't drink alcohol for health benefits. I'm just saying a glass of wine per day with dinner won't have adverse health effects for most people. If you don't currently drink, then there's no reason to start. If you're having more than one drink per day, then you should cut back to just one. If you do drink, then do so several hours before bedtime because alcohol does affect quality of sleep.
It would be dishonest (the intentional omission of relevant truthful fact) to not to disclose the source. If people already don't want the most important truth of all, the very one all of the others depend on always being true to then be true themselves, then they are already choosing to not adopt the truth into their lives and that is their choice. What they choose is not going to help me adopt it any more.
I understand your point, I hear all sorts of religious nonsense, but this is actually the real thing. Why blame the Lord: Truth and Life, for a bunch of people abusing his teachings to control and manipulate others? e.g. don't punish the innocent for the bad deeds and lies of many.
I wrote the paper. So, if I say that is my source, then anyone claiming otherwise must prove different.
I'm not sure I agree with the transition to full automation, but Piketty's premise that returns on assets will outperform returns on labor is still at the root of growing income inequality.
If you have a bankroll, investments will yield higher returns than returns on labor (just working your butt off). Without wealth shocks or redistribution the income inequality gap will continue to widen.
When the CCPA launched in 2018 companies had to comply when a consumer requested a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR). Because the consumer had to request a DSAR not all companies felt this compliance pain acutely (e.g. it was mostly big companies with A LOT of users that got more DSARs, so they adopted workflows and tools to alleviate the pain).
The Delete Act has more teeth. Independent compliance audits begin in 2028 with penalties of $200 per day for failing to register or for each consumer deletion request that is not honored. GDPR spurred organizations to compliance, partly because of the steep penalty (up to €20 million or 4% of revenue, whichever is higher), maybe The Delete Act (and its much smaller penalty) will also spark organizations to comply.
Marissa Mayer on why Google chose sans-serif fonts for search results:
When I had to make a decision about should the Google results pages be serif or sans-serif, I didn't have enough users to do the split A/B testing and mathematically figure that out, so I ended up reading a lot of research and ultimately finding out that serif fonts are more readable, and sans-serif fonts are more legible.
The serifs create a horizontal rule that guides the eye, so serif fonts are much better when you’re reading long pieces of text. Sans-serif fonts are more legible which means that... when the serifs are removed your eye can spot read a character much better and much more quickly, and as a result it is much better for spot reading. In an activity like search it turns out you want to facilitate spot reading to a much greater degree than reading long prose.
On the East Coast there are more cities with dense populations, so public transit can be effective and car ownership rates are lower.
In the West, many cities are urban sprawls that built out instead of up, so public transit is less effective and car ownership rates are higher.
I wish LA or Phoenix or Vegas was dense living where public transit could be effective, but since they’re urban sprawls and public transit isn’t aa effective as a densely populated city, most people own cars to get around.
- Their main source of revenue seems to be decaying, as if the talent that made it great isn't there anymore. Few people would tell you that search (or maps, or youtube) is better today than it ever was.
- Talent is there, and the quality of their moonshots is proof.
Early days are where you can move the needle the most. It's hard to make an impact on a huge, entrenched business that works pretty well and has millions of stakeholders.
Wow. Huge congrats! This is a real business that is profitable.
Our industry focuses so much on venture-backed startups (many of which are unprofitable) that would lose sight of one important goal when starting a business - be profitable!
"We cannot allow Europe's biggest export to be regulation," is the phrase I think of after reading this article. I am hopeful that Europe will continue to cultivate an environment full of talent and capital that can produce formidable alternatives to the hyperscalers.
But, today, as the article notes, "European alternatives do exist...Yet for many organizations, distinguishing real alternatives from false promises has become increasingly difficult."
“A lot of people who don’t currently drink are people who used to drink heavily, or who have health problems that led them to quit...” said Keith Humphreys, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and the Esther Ting Memorial Professor. “That skews the data, making moderate drinkers look healthier by comparison.”
https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2025/08/moderate-alcohol-c...
reply