What do you think will happen to cities?

Where I live, apartments and houses outside cities cost less one third of what a similar apartment would cost in the city. After autonomous cars become commonplace, I can not imagine why I would buy an apartment in the city. Are there any reasons to do so?

People who become passionate about meditation tend to say that the hardest part is encountering "dark things in your mind".

What do meditators mean by this?

I considered creating something like that to be used with Tinder's (unofficial) API. There are a bunch of freely available algorithms one might use for this purpose. I did not seriously attempt this because it's a hard problem, the algorithms are unreliable and difficult, and I'm not even sure if it's something I want or could profit from.

As for why Tinder hasn't done this. It goes against their business model. They would make less money. Tinder wants to keep you as an user for as long as possible, and the whole process of swiping, always wondering what the next one will be like, is their most addictive feature. Ideally they'll only let you go on dates if it's really necessary to keep you as a user. I'd guess that a significant portion of their users just use the app for swiping.

The biggest problem I have with game and game methodology is that we all play a one-shot version. With high stakes of failure. Which means some of the iteration and having to fail while you learn how to not be terrible - will permanently damage your reputation. There is no perfect "retry" - a reputation will follow you basically to the ends of the earth and back. As much as game will teach you some things, the other models in this list have better information for you and are going to go further than game.

Isn't a big part of pick-up that you can iterate, and that there's really almost no punishment for failure other than your own emotions? I can't imagine running out of new people in any large city.

For mobile, there's LW Predictions on Android.

I do not mean that it is impossible to practice, just that it's not a well-defined skill you can measuredly improve like programming. I believe it's not a skill you can realistically practice in order to improve your employability.

I have been following CFAR from their beginning. If anything, the existence and current state of CFAR demonstrates how judgment is a difficult skill to practice, and difficult to measure. There's no evidence of CFAR's effectiveness available on their website (or it is well hidden).

We can't really well practice or even measure most of the recommended skills, such as judgment, critical thinking, time management, monitoring performance, complex problem solving, active learning. This is one of the reasons why I disagree with the article, and think its conclusions are not useful.

They're a bit like saying that high intelligence is associated with better pay and job satisfaction.

80,000 Hours recently ranked "Judgement and decision making" as the most employable skill.

I think they've simplified too much and ended up with possibly harmful conclusions. To illustrate one problem with their methodology, imagine that they had looked at medieval England instead. Their methods would have found kings and nobles having highest pay and satisfaction, and judgment heavily associated with those jobs. The conclusion? "Peasants, practiceth thy judgment!"

What do you think? If there was a twin study where the other twin pursued programming, and the other judgment, who would end up with higher satisfaction and pay? If you think it's not the programmer, why?