Readit NewsNever enjoyed the stuff that got assigned in school though. I’d probably like it now.
I read because I wanted to all the time, but every reading assignment was a chore.
If you care about handwritten your receiver cares they got your letter at all not that it's cursive or not.
Cursive is an outdated skill for when it was the fastest way to get words written to paper.
Anyone using paper + pen? Writing a letter or thank you note?
You know, stuff only people who grew up before the internet was popular still do.
Didn't somebody make an ETF once that went against the prediction of some famous CNBC stock picker, showing that it would have given you alpha in the past.
> seems to be a way harder problem for generic free form comments.
That's what prediction markets are for. People for whom truth and accuracy matters (often concentrated around the rationalist community) will often very explicitly make annual lists of concrete and quantifiable predictions, and then self-grade on them later.
https://finbold.com/inverse-cramer-leaves-sp-nasdaq-and-dow-...
I got an A for commenting on DF saying that I had not personally seen save corruption and listing weird bugs. It's true that weird bugs have long been a defining feature of DF, but I didn't predict it would remain that way or say that save corruption would never be a big thing, just that I hadn't personally seen it.
Another A for a comment on Google wallet just pointing out that users are already bad at knowing what links to trust. Sure, that's still true (and probably will remain true until something fundamental changes), but it was at best half a prediction as it wasn't forward looking.
Then something on hospital airships from the 1930s. I pointed out that one could escape pollution, I never said I thought it would be a big thing. Airships haven't really ever been much of a thing, except in fiction. Maybe that could change someday, but I kinda doubt it.
Then lastly there was the design patent famously referred to as the "rounded corner" patent. It dings me for simplifying it to that label, despite my actual statements being that yes, there's more, but just minor details like that can be sufficient for infringement. But the LLM says I'm right about ties to the Samsung case and still oversimplifying it. Either way, none of this was really a prediction to begin with.
The paper defines a population "at high risk of drug-induced serious adverse events", which presumably means they're also the most likely people to be harmed or killed by the drug trial itself.
What place do carbon credits even have anymore in this economy?
I'll write in (not great) cursive for myself, but for other people? Writing in block or print is basically an accessibility feature. Even if my cursive was perfect, plenty of people would not be able to read it.