Considering the biases, the one I wrote for the company I created.
When we have the opportunity to be in this context, keeping in mind what bothered us in the codebases with which we were able to work in the past, we can force ourselves not to reproduce the same errors. Like the unmaintained unit and integration tests, the lack of refactoring, other developers that use fancy technologies instead of simpler concepts more for the opportunity to play with technologies than real need..
And also, I guess, because we are more aware that the code is a reflection of the company that we want to have, that the simpler the better is a key point when we need to debug.
I would be very interested, if somebody can access the full paper, to know what amount of alcohol is "light drinking" for them.
2 glasses a day ? a week ? a month ? with people ? during dinner ?
"less than 2 drinks a day" would be called "moderate drinking" in my culture. I mean if someone is having a drink or two everyday that is moderate drinking already.
Light drinking for us would be like 3 drinks in a week! 4 drinks/week or more gets us into the moderate drinking territory.
To be fair, "less than 2 drinks a day" covers any range below the upper limit of 2 a day, and hence also includes what you consider light drinking in your culture.
I suppose that the root of the matter is whether or not the range '>0 to <2 drinks a day' on average is too broad and may be hiding a significant difference of outcomes between the top of the range at 2 a day and the (non-abstinents) at the bottom who drink an average of, say, 2 drinks a week.
And that's not even going into regularity. I'm sure that 2 drinks a day on the regular has different health impacts and social implications than 14 drinks a night only on Fridays.
In France, where I am, awareness campaigns recommend sticking to a maximum of 2 glasses per day, for men, 1.5 for women. and not every day.
And these values only take into account protection against serious health problems, such as stroke, not the problems of moderate daily alcohol consumption, such as for example the fact that alcohol being a depressant, consumption will have a impact on their general well-being.
To be honest, I'm even more confused on what to think about this paper.
The J-curve charts I've seen indicated lowest all-cause mortality at 3 drinks / week for men and 2 drinks / week for women. So even if you believe there's something healthy to alcohol (and it's not just the unhealthy people -> have to drink 0), it probably won't be any healthier going past 3 or 2 / week. Portion size is 12oz 5% beer, 5 oz 12% wine, 1.5oz 40% liquor.
Agreed. From what I know, the positive points of certain alcohols such as wine which would protect against heart problems have either been denied, or the same advantages have been found in everyday non-alcoholic products (green tea if I remember well).
This is a general misconception. Alcohol being a depressant doesn't mean that it causes depression - it means that it depresses (that is - it lowers) the activity of nervous system. The opposite of a depressant is a stimulant (like amphetamine), not an antidepressant.
Not sure I understand right what this article is about.
From my point of view, CSV is an easy way to export data from a system to allow an end user to import it in excel and work on this data.
Apart if it's as easy with parquet to import in excel as with a CSV, I'm not sure this is not fixing a problem that doesn't exist. And making things more complicated.
Outside of the context of end user, I don't see any advantages in this compared to xml or json export.
For the 2 people I know who are addicted to heroin, the drug addiction is not the cause of their problems, it's a consequence of a trauma of the past.
They relive this trauma every damn minute. In the beginning of taking drugs, it seemed for them a way to escape reality for some time; to feel in peace.
So yeah, saying "just don't do drugs" to a drug addict is as stupid as saying "just forget your life is a living hell".
Of course, I'm not encouraging drug consumption in any way, but we should have some empathy with them. Most of the time, it's not as simple as it appears.
The SEC can look at each of them.
Compliance and suspicious trading activity mechanisms put in place by financial actors are very sophisticate.
Analyze millions of trades and make reports out of it is not a big deal. I wouldn't be surprised if SEC is already analyzing trades related to stocks impacted by this hack.
When we have the opportunity to be in this context, keeping in mind what bothered us in the codebases with which we were able to work in the past, we can force ourselves not to reproduce the same errors. Like the unmaintained unit and integration tests, the lack of refactoring, other developers that use fancy technologies instead of simpler concepts more for the opportunity to play with technologies than real need..
And also, I guess, because we are more aware that the code is a reflection of the company that we want to have, that the simpler the better is a key point when we need to debug.