Are women not taught to compete? I do not remember girls being any less competitive (in school, in sports, etc.) Almost everyone wants to stand out and be better than others in some aspects and is proud when they can achieve that.
Life is very competitive, I am not sure why need to de-emphasize it to much. Making it "us" vs "them" is the more problematic part, but individual competition is a pretty constructive force overall, for men and women of all colors.
Poker is a niche hobby, not some metaphor of competition in life. That picture says more about poker as a way to spend time than about competing. You might as well show pictures from a fly-fishing competition. I don't play poker, yet I am pretty competitive in many aspect of life. All I know is that pretty much every woman I have talked to wants to be more popular, more famous, more successful. And I have seen girls compete for influence, and grades, and victory in sorts from a very young age.
Everyone is taught to compete. But I don't think competition is the sole driving force, or even the major one that makes sense for humans. Collaboration seems to always be better for people than conflict.
For crypto/security people on this thread, what encryption could app developers use to wrap their API call so that the least amount of information is leaked to this kind of man-in-the-middle services?
I.e, is it possible to:
1) hide which apps are installed on iOS/Android;
2) hide or obfuscate how frequently the app is used;
3) hide specific API calls
I assume at least #3 should be achievable with additional encryption.
May be the first step of regulation should be requiring some standard disclosures around seat sizes, etc. If kayak or some other comparison engine showed that you would are getting 2 extra inches for the $40 more when flying Virgin instead of Frontier (hypothetical example), more people would pick Virgin.
How available is knowledge if nobody knows they can attain it? This is the first I've heard of seatguru, and given the post you responded to, I'd hazard I'm not the only one.
Have you ever tried to search online for information about quality of seating in airplanes? In that case, I'm surprised you didn't cross seatguru before.
You can go really deep down the rabbit hole of seat knowledge with Seatguru, but it's quite time consuming. Their flight search is reasonable, and probably many people who care about seats do use them. But the majority probably does not even suspect that there are major differences in seat sizes between airlines and even planes. So having that information more visible across the board would change incentives more. I also suspect given how many booking sites make money they would be dis-incentivized to do this on their own.
It's not obvious that speaking second language better will come out at the expense of English. I grew up bilingual and was at the top of my class for my second language compared to monolingual natives. There are whole countries of bilingual/trilingual people in Europe who speak their main language very well still. I think knowing a second (and later third) language gave me a better understanding of language structure. Same in sports, if you are athletic, you will have easier time picking up new sports.
My pet theory is that multilingualism multiplies the delta in natural talent: gifted people become stellar writers/talkers, whereas less talented people might suffer from career-inhibiting deficiencies in all languages and often would have been better off focusing on a single language.
I'm far from considering myself multilingual, but if I could somehow trade a part of my English skill for a magical boost in my native language I would gladly take it: half of my English abilities would still be plenty for understanding the occasional stackoverflow post, this place here would be just fine without my contributions and ordering food at a restaurant is actually easier when you can fully embrace the "helpless tourist" level. In my natural language, one level better might be the deciding difference between writing as a necessity and writing as a selling point.
To a first order, it's about how much time you invest into each skill. For me, a non Latin language didn't have noticeable spillover effects into English until much later in my life when I developed decently advanced linguistic proficiency in both languages.
This isn't to say I didn't do well in school -- I was at the top of my class in high school and went to the top ranked university in the country. Still, had I invested more time trading and writing English material during my childhood and adolescence, those skills would have developed much earlier.
And I agree with you about sports. I'm an advanced or white level athlete in 4 or 5 sorts, and it's very easy for me to become producer at a new sport, and I often notice body control, posture, focus, or valance related carryovers.
Trump would probably be a better candidate than either of them, at least he’s actually run a business and would have four years of presidential experience.
The problem with the Trump era is that part of the political establishment is so divorced from reality that expressions of support are indistinguishable from sarcasm.
I almost bought their stuff once. The bottle looked nice, and I was looking for mayo. I was not looking to experiment, so buying their stuff would a a case of me buying something because it pretends to be something else. I want things to be called what they are. They could have called it "I don't believe it's not mayo" or something but they decided to try to trap people. I would feel cheated even if it does taste like mayo, I don't want vegan mayo in my chicken salad.
Come on, is respecting US laws on US soil really that much to ask without the fear of alienating Turkey? There need to be boundaries, even if you care very much about diplomacy.
But why? Animals eat animals, and death is just part of life. Should humans really need to transcend what has been part of our nature for so long because we developed empathy for animals or should we stay close to what we have been all this time. I think that's very much open for arguing. Should we start preventing cats from eating birds? Should we replace every animals diet with vegetarian alternatives?
Because—as half the threads above say, if you'd care to read them—animal farming is very bad for the environment. It's not about the ethics; it's about how much pollution it generates to create the fertilizer and the pesticide to grow the grass or grain that we feed the animals, and about the methane the animals release during their lives—beef-cattle methane, by itself, is 16% of (indirectly-)anthropogenic greenhouse emissions.
Lab-grown meat isn't important because it's "cruelty-free"; it's important because it's possible to make it far, far cheaper in externalities (and, hopefully, in real dollar-value costs as well) than the alternative. That means more people fed balanced diets per carbon-dollar.
Responsible pet owners already prevent cats from eating birds. Dozens of songbird species have gone extinct because of people who let their housecats go outside without supervision... it's not "natural" in any sense to artificially sustain a predator animal so that it can periodically go out and eat songbirds. If housecats had to sustain themselves on what they could catch, there would be much fewer of them and the sustained effect on bird populations would be much smaller.
