The AITA comparison seems apt insofar as chatbots function as a second opinion. You're consciously or subconsciously looking for an outside perspective that might differ from that of your friends, provided to you by a computer that doesn't need to care about your feelings, unlike a friend. If the chatbot ends up mimicking what (not very close) friends do, you might falsely conclude that two very different kinds of sources have converged on the same answer, whereas you are really just getting two flavors of the same diplomatic interaction.
My subjective impression is that 5 years ago AITA was actually quite wholesome and the top comments tended to be insightful. The shift towards "set boundaries, always choose yourself, you don't owe anybody anything" seems fairly recent.
I get the impression that most desktop users enable zram or zswap to get a little bit more out of their RAM but there is never any real worry about OOM, not regularly anyway, so then (according to the principles laid out in the article) it shouldn't matter much.
On my workstation, I run statistical simulations in R which can be wasteful with memory and cause a lot of transient memory pressure, and for that scenario I do like that zswap works alongside regular swap. Especially when combined with the advice from https://makedebianfunagainandlearnhowtodoothercoolstufftoo.c... to wake up kswapd early, it really does seem to make a difference.
It doesn't really need any config on most distros, no.
That said, if you want it to behave at its best when OOM, it does help to tweak vm.swappiness, vm.watermark_scale_factor, vm.min_free_kbytes, vm.page-cluster and a couple of other parameters.
You don't have to pay VAT on things you fix for yourself, because you don't pay yourself at all. This is in fact a kind of (legal) tax avoidance, but not (illegal) tax evasion. Given the cost of housing, being able to build your own house or even just doing small fixes here and there, leads to a big increase in perceived income. The tradies I know can afford whatever kind of car they want, whatever kind of holiday experience, and they live in a nice home. Mind you, they typically work 50h+ a week so there's that.
Of course, the parent may also have been referring to getting clients to pay in cash and not putting anything on the books, at the expense of getting barely any pension in the end, but that's not how I read it. This is getting somewhat less common because people are more likely than 20 years ago to get a loan from a bank to pay for renovation work, and the bank will want to see invoices.
> You don't have to pay VAT on things you fix for yourself, because you don't pay yourself at all.
Just to be clear, if you're a VAT-registered tradie doing a job for yourself, you are obligated to pay VAT for the materials. Diverting vat-reclaimed materials for self-supply is tax evasion (which can be identified by auditing invoices). So legally speaking, the only money saved is the VAT on your own work hours.
Slightly ironically, self-supply is much easier and almost impossible to identify when devs use work-paid subscription services (e.g. Claude Max) on personal side hustles.
Sorry, not VAT - but the value of the benefit you gain from working on your own property (presumably also if you're, say, a car mechanic and work on your own car, etc.) is subject to taxation. Mea culpa.
The obligation to pay tax only kicks in (as far as I can tell, IANAL) if the work is substantial and of a nature which requires professional skills.
Here's a recent link, though in Norwegian, I'm afraid:
Jesus! Spinning this forward, this means: If I'm a professional wealth manager and I manage my own wealth during working hours (because office not busy right now), then I would have to pay taxes because I'm a finance pro applying my own skills on my own stock portfolio?
IANAL, and I have only heard about a couple of cases where people have been taxed under this statute - typically carpenters having built or renovated their own homes or cottages.
(Their obvious disadvantage being, of course, that the result of their labour is very tangible - and that whenever you do any significant building work, you'll need permits and documentation afterwards, making it difficult to discreetly renovate something off the books...)
I have seen very wierd tax laws in other EU countries, but this is really "fresh": In that case I would somehow try to do it without someone noticing (so treat your neighbours well :-D) - this is similar to collect taxes on food that Ive grown on my balcony
I read the Norwegian article that was linked, and it isn't actually similar: you would only have to pay taxes on food you've grown on your balcony (and mean to consume yourself) if you are a farmer, are growing it during regular working hours, and have an insanely huge balcony.
Another thing that makes home construction a bit different in this regard is that you could claim to build a house for yourself, live in it for a bit, and then sell it on a couple of years later. That'd be an easy way to avoid or evade taxes. Not so easy with lettuce -- once you've eaten it, you've eaten it.
Context was getting income. You don't get income, by avoiding paying more. So it is about black market jobs. Works until something happens. Disputes, accidents, .. you cannot go to the police or courts to demand money from an inoffical job.
Doesn't this argument hinge on equivocating between two different definitions of aversion, though? I'm averse to bananas, but that doesn't mean I think it's immoral to eat them. The moral dimension kicks in if somebody else had to ride that stationary bike for you, because then you'd be wasting their time on frivolities.
So if I send an email that lacks a feature that MUST be there, will the email police come get me? At a certain point, looking for an analogy stops making sense I think.
I mean, kind of, yeah? If you're sending traffic that fails to meet the MUST requirements, you're probably going to be marked as malicious traffic and eventually wind up on spam/bot lists. If you fail to do the SHOULD things, you might find yourself in some odd edge cases of your peers and experience behavior you didn't expect.
One of the things I like most about CachyOS is that the configuration is all just in text files, one of the things I like least is that I am never quite sure whether to modify the systemd unit settings that are usually in /usr/lib somewhere, the app settings in /etc or the personal configs in ~/.config. For packages that I am unfamiliar with, I usually end up trying all three locations until I notice that my changes seem to stick.
The installer also completely broke the Windows partition that came with the workstation even though I was planning on dual booting, but oh well, no great loss there.
Other than that, there are some small conveniences and apps that I miss from MacOS (the mac calendar and mail apps are just so nice!) but the Niri window manager is just so amazing that at this point I don't think there's anything that could make me switch back.
The thing about second order effects is that they are almost never larger than the first order effect.
Furthermore, GLP-1 users report having fewer cravings or just reduced appetite in general, whereas what you describe would require some sort of "calorie reduction pill" which would allow people to lose weight without altering their relationship to food. But that pill does not exist.
> The thing about second order effects is that they are almost never larger than the first order effect.
Sounds clever but this is just a labeling trick. When a second order effect is larger than the first order one, we just rename them to first order and intermediate effects.
For example, the first order effects of growing GLP-1 prevalence are actually consumption of prescription pads, new demand on pill bottles, and gas consumption of pharma sales reps.
The second order effect is weight loss in patients who take the drugs.
Cute and thus worthy of an upvote, but whenever I see scientists or economists refer to first or second order effects it pertains to things that are subsequent to each other in time, or at least intended vs. ancillary. I don't think anyone except for a Stafford "the purpose of a system is what it does" Beer acolyte would designate new demand of pill bottles as the first order effect of a new medication.
It's just something that statisticians have observed across many fields: you theorize about how potentially huge a particular interaction effect or knock-on effect could be relative to the main effect, you read about the Jevons Paradox and intuitively feel that it can explain so much of the world today... and then you get the data and it just almost never does. No reason why it couldn't, just empirically it rarely happens.
The demand for pill bottles literally does grow before anyone takes the medication, no?
And correct I agree they wouldn't designate the demand for pill bottles as the first order effect. That's because despite happening first, it's not the most important object of analysis. That's why it's a disproof of your earlier claim that second order effects aren't more significant than first order ones: because if they were, they'd be considered the first order effect.
> The demand for pill bottles literally does grow before anyone takes the medication, no?
Only really in the US. In most other countries they use blister packs instead. Global consumption of blister packs is so huge (not just for prescription medications, also OTC, vitamins, supplements, and complementary medicines), even a blockbuster medication likely only makes a modest difference to manufacturer demand in percentage terms.
> For example, the first order effects of growing GLP-1 prevalence are actually consumption of prescription pads, new demand on pill bottles, and gas consumption of pharma sales reps.
I take injectable tirzepatide prescribed by an electronic prescription… so impact on pill bottle demand and prescription pad demand in my case is literally zero.
And I doubt pharma sales reps have a lot of work to do selling GLP-1 agonists-who needs to convince doctors to prescribe a drug when there’s dozens of patients inquiring about it?
Yes the article is about pills, but most people are on injectables still (that may change over time). It likely has increased demand for needles and sharps containers. But in dollar terms, that’s a small percentage of the demand for the medication itself.
reply