jm__87 (u/jm__87) - Readit News

jm__87 commented on What is it like to be a bat? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wha... · Posted by u/adityaathalye

the_af · 3 days ago

> None of us have even experienced the full range of what humans can experience, so even we don't fully know what it is like to be any given person

I sometimes wonder about this, too. Do other people perceive things like I do? If someone was magically transplanted to my body, would they scream in pain "ooooh, this hurts, how could he stand it", whereas I consider the variety of discomforts of my body just that, discomforts? And similarly, were I magically transported to another person's body, would I be awestruck by how they see the world, how they perceive the color blue (to give an example), etc?

jm__87 · 3 days ago

Another thing I think about a lot is that our own brains and sensory organs change (degrade) over time, so my own subjective experience is probably different in some important ways than it was like 20 years ago. My memory likely isn't good enough to fully capture the differences, so I don't even fully know what it was like to be me in the past.

jm__87 commented on What is it like to be a bat? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wha... · Posted by u/adityaathalye

adityaathalye · 3 days ago

“I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center.”

— Kurt Vonnegut

In this sense, I think one has to aaaaaalmost be a bat in order to know what it is to be it. A fine thread trailing back to the human.

The imago-machines of Arkady Martine's "A Memory Called Empire" come to mind. Once integrated with another's imago, one is not quite the same self, not even the sum of two, but a new person entirely containing a whole line of selves selves melded into that which was one. Now one truly contains multitudes.

jm__87 · 3 days ago

None of us have even experienced the full range of what humans can experience, so even we don't fully know what it is like to be any given person, we only know what it is like to be ourselves. It is kind of amazing when you think about it.

jm__87 commented on Cysteine depletion triggers adipose tissue thermogenesis and weight loss nature.com/articles/s4225... · Posted by u/bookofjoe

colordrops · 3 months ago

I can relate. I was overweight most of my life. I had to peel away layers of bad narrative and misunderstanding, and also train my discipline circuits to get "lean". And it's still a struggle every day. I'm one of those people who gain weight on a lot less calories than other people. My wife is 2 inches shorter and weighs 50 lbs less than I, and eats twice the calories per day. Mind you, we track every gram of food and weigh it on a scale, and enter it into a diet tracking app (Cronometer in our case). So I am SUPER familiar with everything you are saying.

What I am getting at is that most people are not able to initially grasp this nuance, and the fundamental fact is that there IS a threshold of calories where you WILL lose weight no matter what. It's up to every individual to work on their motivation, but frankly that's orthogonal to the facts of the matter, and it's better to be direct rather than tell half-truths because it's "complicated". I almost never see discussions of motivation and differences in metabolism in these types of threads elsewhere, and to just assume the average person understand these factors is a mistake. The first thing people need to learn is that cutting down food will lose weight, point blank. Then you can add on layers about metabolism and motivation as the journey continues.

jm__87 · 3 months ago

Yea, I get what you're saying. It is unhelpful when people act as if cutting enough calories and/or increasing exercise enough won't lead to weight loss, because obviously it will. Insufficient motivation is definitely a problem for a lot of people, but I think it is also possible to be so metabolically deranged that motivation actually becomes a secondary issue when you have very strong hormonal signals telling you that you need to eat more.

jm__87 commented on Cysteine depletion triggers adipose tissue thermogenesis and weight loss nature.com/articles/s4225... · Posted by u/bookofjoe

jm__87 · 3 months ago

Genetics obviously doesn't break the laws of physics. You cannot get fat without calories in exceeding calories out. With that said, if dieting means you are ravenously hungry all the time, leaves you feeling overwhelmed with stress or leaves you lacking energy to do the bare minimum you need to do (i.e. work, chores, caring for kids, etc), then you're going to find it very difficult to lose weight. These are the actual problems people struggle with when trying to lose weight, which I think lean people often struggle to relate to.

jm__87 commented on It's always TCP_NODELAY brooker.co.za/blog/2024/0... · Posted by u/todsacerdoti

Reason077 · a year ago

Surely serious HFT systems bypass TCP altogether now days. In that world, every millisecond of latency can potentially cost a lot of money.

These are the guys that use microwave links to connect to exchanges because fibre-optics have too much latency.

jm__87 · a year ago

They still need to send their orders to an exchange, which is often done with FIX protocol over TCP (some exchanges have binary protocols which are faster than FIX, but the ones I'm aware of still use TCP)

jm__87 commented on How South Korea’s birth rate dropped below Japan’s nippon.com/en/in-depth/d0... · Posted by u/neom

AuryGlenz · 2 years ago

Are we sure that there's nothing else going on with fertility rates? It seems odd to me that one of the primary drives of humanity has fallen off of a cliff so quickly. Sure, it mostly manifests as a drive to have sex and we can get around that with birth control, but that's not the only thing it does to us. There's a reason the concept of the "biological clock ticking" is a thing.

We know testosterone levels are dropping: "After controlling for confounders—including year of study, age, race, BMI, comorbidity status, alcohol and smoking use, and level of physical activity—total testosterone was lower among men in the later (2011-2016) versus earlier (1999-2000) cycles (P < 0.001). Mean total testosterone decreased from 1999-2000 (605.39 ng/dL), 2003-2004 (567.44 ng/dL), 2011-2012 (424.96 ng/dL), 2013-2014 (431.76 ng/dL), and 2015-2016 (451.22 ng/dL; all P < .0001)."

https://www.urologytimes.com/view/testosterone-levels-show-s...

Setting aside that semen quality is also affected... Maybe testosterone, or other hormones that might be affected by the same thing, also affect the drive to have children? It seems the more urban a civilization, the lower the birth rate.

When I just tried to look up if anyone has looked into that I couldn't find anything, but here's a nice overview of different theories on fertility rates dropping as a whole: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977063/

jm__87 · 2 years ago

Weird to be wondering if men are to blame here when women are typically the ones who have the final say as to when and with whom they decide to settle down and have kids with. Personally I think it is a combination of couples not wanting to have kids for a variety of reasons (not wanting to sacrifice their quality of life, lack of economic security, anxieties about the future), women delaying childbirth for longer to focus on education and career (and possibly waiting too long and not being able to have children by the time they are ready), women becoming pickier with who they choose to date and marry with the reality of hypergamy (women with higher educational and career attainment typically want to date men who are at least as successful as they are, and women are increasingly outperforming men in education and career these days). I'm sure men have some blame in this too, but most single men I know would prefer to not be single, but can't seem to find anyone interested.

jm__87 commented on What’s causing the rise of hoarding disorder? (2019) daily.jstor.org/whats-cau... · Posted by u/rntn

thevagrant · 2 years ago

I've known someone close who is affected their whole life. I'm talking extreme hoarding, cramming junk into any space available.

It led me to spend a lot of time considering what causes their behavior.

Not only do they hoard, but the process of hoarding also inflicts psychological damage against their close family.

I think it is a combination of self delusion and obsessive control.

Self delusion: The hoarder tends to believe each item they have kept has value or will be valuable someday. Almost as if for each item kept, it is the equivalent of having an unclaimed lottery ticket that will win eventually. Now, try convincing someone to throw away a lottery ticket before the date of the draw.

The interesting part is the hoarder would not sell the item, even if it was found to be very valuable (most 99.9% is junk). It is about the items perceived value.

Strangely I've seen many instances of hoarders have something of real value only stashed amongst a heap of junk and not stored appropriately (damaging the item in the process through neglect over time)

Control: This aspect is about controlling the situation and those around them. They are not interested in anyone else have a say in the matter.

There is a complete lack of empathy toward those affected by the consequences of hoarding (family etc)

The hoarders I've met tend to be very intelligent and manipulative (and verbally abusive) if they suspect someone is going to try impress change upon them. (A situation they perceive to not be in control)

jm__87 · 2 years ago

> There is a complete lack of empathy toward those affected by the consequences of hoarding (family etc)

> The hoarders I've met tend to be very intelligent and manipulative (and verbally abusive) if they suspect someone is going to try impress change upon them. (A situation they perceive to not be in control).

I'm sorry, but this is just a horrible way to characterize a group of people with clear mental health issues. The reason extreme hoarders are extreme hoarders is probably because their drive to hoard stuff is stronger than literally every other emotion they have, including any empathy they have for those affected. Maybe the hoarder you know is manipulative and has low empathy, but the hoarder I knew was very empathetic and not a manipulative person. She had a ton of shame about it and refused to talk about it or address it.

jm__87 commented on How we turned the tables to catch my sister’s Bumble stalker major-grooves.medium.com/... · Posted by u/behnamoh

genderwhy · 3 years ago

I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the normal levels of inhibitions and reading social cues aren't present in many stalking cases. There is a belief that if they are just persistent enough, their target will see their attempts as affection and fall head over heals for them.

Fundamentally, I believe we need to do more for people like this. Safety nets and mental health and, if needed, in patient care. Would this have happened if the person had access to excellent therapy, medication, and support? Maybe, maybe not, but I would like to think that it would happen a whole lot less.

jm__87 · 3 years ago

> There is a belief that if they are just persistent enough, their target will see their attempts as affection and fall head over heals for them.

Depends on the kind of stalker. I think you get these delusional obsessive people, but you also get abusive exes who stalk their ex to keep them from moving on or try to scare and intimidate and sometimes assault or kill their new partners.

jm__87 commented on Ask HN: Recovered insomniacs of HN please give me some advice · Posted by u/kypro

jm__87 · 3 years ago

CBT-I worked for me. The key for this to work (as with all CBT) is to actually do the exercises given and not just read it/try to do it in your head. Good luck.

jm__87 commented on The Schizoid Difference eden.bearblog.dev/the-sch... · Posted by u/memorable

fithisux · 3 years ago

"because it's not fair on them to cause them to start worrying like I do."

but apart from the chivalry

maybe cause them to start worrying is a movement of kindness and fairness after all. Unless you prefer them to live in utopia and you in reality.

jm__87 · 3 years ago

I mean, if you're focused on reading all the terrible things going on in the world all the time, you aren't actually living in reality. You're living in a reality created by journalists whose job is to get you to click on their articles - usually by reporting the most depressing or terrifying news with a strongly negative bias.