rmoehn

Software developer at Spark Wave, working on GuidedTrack.

Comments

A cognitive intervention for wrist pain

Short answer, if you want to try a psychological approach (hopefully you will get better before you've tried all of this):

  1. Read my article carefully several times. If something is unclear, you can ask questions in the comments or send me a private message.
  2. Read John E. Sarno's The Mindbody Prescription.
  3. Learn cognitive-behavioural (self-)therapy.

There are several options for cognitive-behavioural therapy, from cheap to expensive.

Meditation can be helpful if you want to improve awareness of body and thoughts. But it's a wide field and there are risks.

Whenever you try an intervention, pay attention to whether it makes you feel less stressed and more relaxed, and whether your wrists feel better.

One physical intervention, just in case: Do you type a lot? If yes, have you tried different keyboards? Most keyboards are fine for most people, so I don't think you need a super expensive super ergonomic one. But some keyboards give even me trouble and it's worth ruling that out. Go to an electronics shop and try the keyboards there. Does typing feel better than with your normal keyboard? If you don't have an electronics shop available, the Microsoft Sculpt Ergonomic Keyboard is a safe bet. It's around 60 USD.


Note that I'm neither a doctor nor a therapist. All the above is based on my personal experience or what I've heard.

Why has nuclear power been a flop?

Yeah, 24 h variability is what I meant. Producing hydrogen or methane for longer-term storage sounds interesting.

Why has nuclear power been a flop?

Thanks for your counter-arguments! I've added them to my notes.

Why has nuclear power been a flop?

Thanks for your counter-counterpoints. I've added them to my notes.

Re. smart grids: Of course they don't produce energy themselves. We would need the capacity to produce enough during winter. But they address the problem of supply variability. And the energy grid modelers at my friend's company have found that they can address it sufficiently.

Why has nuclear power been a flop?

Nuclear power is the sword that can cut it: a scalable source of dispatchable (i.e., on-demand), virtually emissions-free energy. It takes up very little land, consumes very little fuel, and produces very little waste.

For balance, here are a few counterpoints, which I recently heard from a friend and have not verified myself:

  • There is only enough uranium to provide half of the world's power for fifty years.
  • Renewable energy sources have become cheaper than nuclear power in recent years.
  • Mining for uranium ore and producing uranium does occupy much land, consume much energy and emit much carbon dioxide. The reason is that there is only about one ton of uranium per forty tons of ore. (Renewables don't consume as much land as some people say, since you can put solar cells on roofs, grow crops under the panels of solar farms etc.)
  • Mining and producing uranium also results in much waste in the form of tailings.
  • Smart grids can solve the base load power problem with renewables.

Personally, I haven't made up my mind in the go nuclear/stop nuclear dimension. I don't need to, since it's not something I'm going to or trying to have much influence on. But the above are points I would like to see addressed when arguing for increasing nuclear energy production. They're also great points to put numbers on and compare with renewables.

Overconfidence

I agree, it's hard to avoid making enemies. Even harmony-seeking people annoy others who have little interest in harmony. (I'm not talking about anything Confucian here.) Then again, it's better to make enemies with discretion, and not use it as an excuse for bad behaviour.

Overconfidence

Other people—especially women—love me when I'm a cocky arrogant megalomaniac.

Maybe it just divides people? Average behaviour doesn't move the liking scale. Cocky arrogant megalomaniac behaviour makes the liking scale swing positive in some people, negative in others. And since you're in a cocky, arrogant mode, you only notice those who like you.

The airplane example illustrates it, too. I bet a good share of passengers thought, ‘what ****er is delaying the airplane now?’, whereas another share smiled about Gates' nerve.

If you get things done by making enemies, in the end you don't get much (good) done. Cf. many of the people you listed.

I'm leaving AI alignment – you better stay

Sounds good! I wish you luck in finding a good area. And I suggest another criterion: ‘3) I enjoy working in area X.’ – It's not strictly necessary. Some things you only start enjoying after you've been doing them for a while. But it certainly helps with the dawdling if you're more eager to work on X than to dawdle.

By the way, I've added another clarification to the paragraph above: ‘Perhaps trying to produce results by doing projects is fine. But then I should have done projects in one area and not jumped around the way I did. This way I would have built experience upon experience, rather than starting from scratch everytime.

Nuclear war is unlikely to cause human extinction

I appreciate the Bottom Line Up Front writing style. Not only overall, but also in each subsection. Thank you!

Load More