Epenthesis's comments

I'm certainly an outlier, but it seems intuitively likely that I'm experiencing a subset of what other people experience, rather than a disjoint. Ie, other people feel the socio-emotional component as well as the lust component, with me lacking the latter.

However, it might be difficult for most people to orthogonalize these two components, since for them they occur simultaneously. That's the relevance of my asexuality to my comment: I suspect it allows me to experience the socio-emotional component without also experiencing the lust component, and thereby more easily see them as different.

If it's true that there's both a lust and socio-emotional component, it still seems inaccurate (or at least, idiosyncratic) to refer to the combination of the two as "lust".

I'm not sure that's true.

I have little to no sex drive (am "asexual" as the kids say), but I've had intense crushes/obsessive feelings about individuals with no associated desire to have sex with the targets thereof.

I imagine that for people with normal sex drives, both components play a role in initial relationship formation; ie, there's an emotional component in addition to "lust" as conventionally defined.

You could quibble that these (relatively short lived) intense emotions are "lust", as opposed to the "love" of a longer relationship, but that seems to be playing a semantic game that doesn't really concord with how we generally use those words.

It's interesting how different "bubbles" of software development can be.

For me, as an engineer whose worked across FAANG and YC startups in San Francisco, Angular has had absolutely zero mindshare for at least the past 6-7 years. Every company I know uses React and every engineer I know knows React. So it's interesting and somewhat alien to hear it being treated as the default option.

That's what the first image in the article is purporting to show (~33% of people in the general population over 85 have dementia)

While it's true that the article indicates FB views comments as positive signals, that's definitely not the primary focus of it, which is about likes vs "higher intentionality likes + other emotions".

It's weird to me that that article's headline emphasizes "angry emojis" have 5x higher score than "likes (and repeats it in the first paragraph) and then only lower down explains it's in fact that any emotion emoji (including "love", "care" and "haha") produce a 5x higher score than a simple like.

And it doesn't even explicitly state it, instead saying first "A person was able to react with emojis that correlated to “angry,” “sad,” “haha,” “love” and “wow.”" and then "If a person reacted with an emoji instead of the “like” button, the Facebook algorithm would see the post as five times more valuable and push similar content.", requiring the user to draw an inference that all emojis were treated equally, despite the priming that it only refers to "angry" earlier in the article.

This feels, ironically, like an intentionally inflammatory framing.

Put in 3 M$/yr and you'll get 50.7%.

Not a lot of people hitting that regularly, but I imagine it can sting a little if you've got a more proletarian salary normally and are hitting that region just once because of say, a start up liquidity windfall

Roughly 0.6% of NYC has died from COVID, so it's impossible for its IFR to be 0.2%

Is Derby pronounced with the first syllable rhyming with "car" or "her" (/dɑ:bi/ or /dɜ:bi/)?

I imagine this depends on what circles you run in. I feel like in silicon valley, the modal image is of a FAANG employee making 400 k$/yr.

It is a protected title in Canada, requiring a license, but not in the United States.

In the US, the title "Professional Engineer" is roughly equivalent and similarly requires a license.

He was right in a sense, the 00s and 10s were the era of the dynamic languages. In momentum if never quite in absolute usage.

But my sense is that we're gradually swinging back around to static typing via gradual typing + mainstreaming of ML style features like generics, unions, records that are more expressive than the C/Java model.

My impression as a 30 year old het guy in SF is that the big 3 are Tinder/Bumble/Hinge, roughly sorted in order of "casual" to "serious relationship".

According to friends, OkCupid seems to be baaarely limping along in queer/poly circles.

Eh, luck + effort beats luck, but luck by itself pretty often beats effort.

I'm a good deal wealthier than some much harder working + smarter friends of mine because I lucked into joining some (moderately) successful startups.

Seems to use the same uh, emphatic pronunciation so long as "gallo" is at the end of the translation sentence. Any text with something after "gallo" sounds more normal.

I believe it's true for most of the sprachbund, including my native language Kannada (which is a Dravidian language very much unrelated to Hindi)

Oh wow, my mistake!

I personally have the merger, and so I misunderstood which direction the split went.

The goal of pinyin was not to make Mandarin words pronounceable to English speakers, but to be a consistent means of representing the sounds of Mandarin to Mandarin speakers.

Thanks for the suggestion. It was difficult for me to think of an example without resorting to IPA, since my own American accent is fully cot/caught + father/bother merged.

* Spanish: "hacer"

* French: "pas"

* Italian: "casa"

* Mandarin (written using pinyin): "bàng"

* German: "katze"

* Japanes (written in romaji): "arigato"

* Bahasa Indonesia: "bahasa"

Note that the sounds in these various languages are not exactly the same, but the "au" in "caught" is the closest sound in the native phonological inventory of a General American speaker (given said speaker pronounces "caught" and "cot" differently).