The correct amount of rest is the amount you wouldn’t dare admit to anybody. And may not be able to afford to take.
My first instinct was to call this a repost as I remember seeing this like 4 years ago on reddit but this is a different platform altogether.
Though it Is worth the reminder to Treat yo self
Should you even call something out as a repost when the last time it was posted was 4 years ago?
After all, millions of people have been born and grown up during that time
I mean yeah that’s true.
But on reddit reposts were everywhere and it was very common for bots to karma farm by doing so, so calling it out had a purpose.
People who have already seen something know they’ve seen it. They can just skip it. To somebody else it will be new. The vast majority of items being called reposts on reddit were things I had never seen. Whining about reposts might give someone a false sense of accomplishment, but I found it to be useless noise.
reposts should still probably be labelled as such and link back to older posts
That’s not a terrible idea - it would be a link to the existing discussion of the topic, which is informative. I like that better than people just whining RePoSt!!1!
One feature I feel like I want to see eventually is a list of links to reposts attached at the top of the post, so if someone reposts the same thing, or topic, or question, then if another person recognizes it and finds a previous link, the link could be added to the list and anyone who wants to see the “extended universe” of comments can browse them. That way discussion’s larger context is far more easy to see, and quality answers for example can be more easily found by anyone browsing after the link has been found.
I’m not sure if it would be if genuine utility, but people are already doing the work of finding these links to the past, I feel like we might as well make it official and make it a feature?
I’m curious what the rest of you think.
Yeah, I think this is a great idea. An automatic implementation would be easy if it’s a repeat of a that was already posted. Somewhat more difficult if it’s the same news but from a different source - dunno if that’s even technically a repost but it kind of is.
My thoughts exactly. On reddit I used to reply to repost complaints, which I find annoying, by saying that they were the most reposted thing I saw. But tbh their frequency has seemed to decrease, almost as if they’re being auto-removed. If so, I appreciate it. A subject showing up repeatedly just means somebody’s still interested in it.
For those like me that had never seen this before: https://www.vogue.com/article/paris-hilton-debunks-stop-being-poor-shirt
This apparently never happened.
is the real slogan that much better though lol
“Stop Being Desperate” has a real “Let them eat cake” feel, especially coming from her.
Paris Hilton is a sexual abuse survivor that built a public persona of an “airhead” to sell to people to build up her own wealth away from her brutal family. The “rich spoiled girl tries common people’s things” was an act.
Shes at this point working as an activist to shut these abusive organizations down.
Was at a party with her at Cannes a decade ago and she was DJing, and was actually kinda good at it. She was with some young boy toy acting like a party girl. Soon as her set ended and the cameras went off it was like watching a switch flip. The dude left and she seemed to go have a quiet drink with a group of friends I couldn’t make out. I learned about her past and business behind the scenes shortly after and felt like you know what, respect. Get that paper girl.
I’m aware of and support her current work and I agree that she’s much smarter than her public persona would lead people to believe. However, she still comes from a place of unbelievable privilege and telling people to “stop being desperate” is incredibly tone deaf, IMO.
Two things can be true at the same time.
She’s a wealthy heiress yes, but her parents did use their wealth to send her to a teenage torture facility. As a survivor of a similar facility, the fact that she is speaking up about those hellholes and might help get them closed down makes her absolutely amazing.
Yeah but it’s funny
Lmao true
But like, also demonstrably not true. Which is kinda funny tbh.
We are a paradox.
Its work
Working, in the way that we do, takes years off of our lives and ruins the quality of life of people in their final years too.
I mean, its a meme and the message is put across very well but, for me, an important distinction for the comments section is that wealth increases life, as much as, if not more than poverty decreases it. Its wealth specifically and not wages too. After a certain point, increased wages actually have an inverse effect on lifespan which I’m sure comes as no surprise to anyone and the reason is both self explanatory and further supports what I’m saying.
Just so its been said, wealth, in these instances, refers to capital that makes you money. More specifically, wealth gives you money from NOT from working.
The exact point at which life expectancy and QoL increases is always around the exact level of wealth and passive income someone would need to drastically lower their working hours or stop completely.
A second argument: women live longer than men. There are some biological factors for this, such as oestrogen being a vasodilator etc. However, it wasn’t really enough to explain the differences we were seeing.
The thing is, this unexplained gap has started getting smaller and smaller. Now, unless there’s been a fundamental change in the average womans physiology recently, only one thing has changed in our society to the extent that it could effect something like this. Its also filtering through at around the exact time it should be, were the trend to be caused work.
Nothing else reconciles all of the positions, let alone so perfectly and in one single stroke.
Edit: so many typos
Its work
Working, in the way that we do, takes years off of our lives and ruins the quality of life of people in their final years too.
Work has never been so unstressful, if you look back at the history of mankind.
Industrialization killed workers with 60 hour shifts in unsafe environments. Middle ages made you work 18 hours a day once you were 7 and made you starve if the harvest was bad. In the stone age your family died from hunger after you got killed on the hunt.
Life expectancy was never as high as today.
And yet, we actually have the capacity now to provide for everyone’s needs without working anyone to death.
So why don’t we?
Capitalism unfortunately
So you agree your comment is irrelevant?
In this case all comments are irrelevant? What makes you think the comment I commented on is relevant, but mine isn’t? What’s the difference?
If one comment is irrelevant, it’s yours right now, because it didn’t add any thought or value to the topic.
Work has never been so unstressful, if you look back at the history of mankind.
I agree that it was even worse before. Although, I’m a little puzzled as to what point is being made. Are you agreeing with me or not? I can’t tell.
Industrialization killed workers with 60 hour shifts in unsafe environments. Middle ages made you work 18 hours a day once you were 7 and made you starve if the harvest was bad. In the stone age your family died from hunger after you got killed on the hunt.
Life expectancy was never as high as today.
Looking back at what I wrote, what point is all this agreeing with or refuting?
To me, it seems like you’re arguing that the passage of time is a good thing. I don’t remember saying that the passage of time wasn’t good.
Do I have to agree or disagree? I just pointed out that work today isn’t worse than yesterday.
You would have to define how you’re using “have to” here. I mean, I wouldn’t try to come and attack you for neither agreeing not disagreeing with a subject you still managed to have such strong a need to inject in.
Partly because you might be bigger than me but mostly because I generally only see doing that as soemthing I strongly frown upon, in even the most severe of cases. I’m not particularly keen on forcing people to do anything, in fact.
Really, though only you can answer that question.
I’m glad we agree that our lives are probably better now than they for the people who literally had to live in caves, thousands of years ago, though. Thank you for including that important point.
You are being downvoted by people who didn’t read all of your comment, you are right, job has never being so unstressful but unstressful ≠ happy,
Along the same theoretical lines, it seems plausible to me that the inner stresses of being an asshole might do the same thing. So maybe there’s some justice in the world after all.
I would like to believe this, unfortunately the large number of very old assholes seems to indicate otherwise.
You think you hate being around them, they have to be around them all the time. They lose if they live a long or a short time.
…shorter ? can one be outlived by their asshole ?
I think the trick is not caring that you are one and probably believing you are always right, everyone else doesn’t matter and that you are the center of the universe, so that the side effects really don’t apply to you because that’s your reality no remorse to dwell on.
I sometimes wonder how much my childhood shortened my lifespan. I think work wouldn’t top that stress I had.
Have you taken the ACES test? I thought it was a great eye opener. At least it was for me.
Just did, didn’t cover anything relating to my issues. I scored a 1, and that’s only because “Was a household member depressed or mentally ill” fits me.
I’m glad I’ve never taken it before because I definitely would’ve interpreted it as a sign that I didn’t really experience anything bad and that I’m just so bad at everything I can’t function in even a normal environment. At least now I can stand up for myself and say that’s not true. Still sucks to feel unseen by a test whose name claims to be general.
On the ACES assessment, every single one of the 10 things asked about is known to cause neurological issues in children which persist throughout their lives. Only a 0 is insignificant. A 1 is very significant. I also scored “low” and thought it didn’t mean anything, but I’ve since learned every single one means a lot.
Even my 1 feels a bit cheated, since I’m assuming the intent of that question was someone in my family other than me has depression. I guess you can say it correctly predicted me having high risk, but it’s obvious from the kinds of questions asked that that’s mostly accidental, and that my struggles weren’t really considered.
I scored an eight and while I don’t let it define me, it has been helpful for some stuff.
I hope this result doesn’t put you off of looking for the help you need. Remember that this is just a tool out of many available now and while this wasn’t for you, that doesn’t mean there’s not something for you out there.
Well, I mostly solved the depression with estrogen, and coincidentally I’m seeing a therapist tomorrow for what I think to be CPTSD and some other symptoms I don’t know much about. I’m suddenly collecting an avalanche of diagnoses it would seem.
Ugh been there. In my case an autoimmune condition was the culprit in the end. Hope you find an answer to what is bothering you, friend.
I know I posted this before, but it’s an important reminder.
Please repost regularly, we shan’t forget.
I always say that the most damage my health took was not from drinking and smoking excessively - the most damage came from the stress of a defunct childhood and the subsequent lifestyle.
Yeah, know what you mean.
Turns out everything is political
I’d love to see the bibliography from that elective
it’s not encouraging to think of someone being in med school and not reading the course description before signing up. if there was no course description that’s almost even worse
As someone who teaches chemistry to premeds, this is not surprising at all. To make a sweeping generalization, premeds, med students, and the MDs they become are some of the most entitled, condescending, and oblivious people I’ve ever met.
There are exceptions of course, but in general, I can’t stand most premeds and I really can’t stand how our culture puts MDs on a pedestal.
yea, a friend of mine from high school went through all of it and became a general surgeon. and i’ve heard stories. that and my experience from dating and living with a CFer lung transplant patient probably gave me as much of an “outsider’s view” of the medical/hospital industry as one could possibly have
the MD=pedestal thing died for me long ago
i know i’m not talking about the “point” of the post. don’t care.
So I’m curious. The way I see it, the actual practicing of medicine doesn’t advance the field itself. What advances it is research and development. Do the researchers actually go though med school or is that path more like biology PhD, chemistry PhD, etc?
There are medical researchers that have MD’s, but they are not practicing physicians (usually). There are MD/PhD programs that are aimed toward medical research fields (usually with the PhD being in biology or chemistry as you mentioned), and lots of biological and biomedical engineers working on certain medical fields as well (especially using stem cells and other chemical cues to regrow tissues). So yeah, biology- and physiology-adjacent sciences are where most of the actual advances are happening.
Actually practicing medicine is basically like being a mechanic that specializes in keeping one particularly poorly designed piece of equipment running.
So was a wrong, most researchers go through MD/PhD programs? Like what percent of researchers go through medical school? 50/50?
I don’t know that you’re wrong, because those MD/PhD programs are exceptionally demanding (but are a good way to avoid med school debt for some). It’s more that even for pure MD’s, research is a very, very different career path than practicing physician. I think researchers still have to go through residency, but after that they’re mostly designing and arranging clinical trials, writing grants, interacting with related university departments, etc.
So, you know, research stuff rather than patient stuff.
edit: to address your actual question, I have no idea what the numbers for each path look like. A lot of those fields get so interrelated that it probably depend a lot on how you define “medical research.” Does genetics count? Genomics? Biomedical engineering, definitely, but what about the material scientists that develop the new dental polymers? It all gets pretty hazy when you drill down on specifics
Edit 2: I also suppose I should say that my experience with science research is almost entirely in public/university research from about a decade back, so current private sector research could vary a lot from my experience. I don’t think it’s that different though, given what I’ve heard from friends and coworkers.
hardly the point
We all understand the point. But it’s important to question the source. It suggests a gullability, or fabrication.
It was probablly just a list of 20 humanities electives they had to pick 4 of for gen Ed requirements (not say9ng this is a bad thing maybe if there was more of this 1/4 of every engineering class wouldn’t go straight to Lockheed martin)
They’re supposed to be less rigorous and a little more general than other courses, this is really grasping at straws for a reason to ignore the point being made.
There might have been a less than clear course description. Also, it may have been the lack of sleep.
