That's complete nonsense if you are TRULY hungry. If a salad fills you up, you have psychological hunger, not a real energy need.

I have been in a situation where I accepted very light super (even though I run every day), in particular salads and invariably I have been awoken at night hungry as hell.

Real hunger is satisfied with calories (and your ability to process them) not the volume they have.

I relate to this experience (not teetotaler but slow starter/drinker and I watch my consumption). I especially relate to the petty/cruel observations, particularly in the context of big family meals/events.

I think it's one of the reason people "like" alcohol, it gives them both the courage and an excuse to say whatever they want/feel.

But you seem to be making excuses/explanation for this, I don't agree, what people become under the influence of alcohol is who they truly are, without the mask and restraints. If someone becomes petty/cruel/violent or whatever, you just learned that they cannot be trusted and are a bad person, no needs to explain away with alcohol influence.

In general, drugs amplify or make obvious who peoples are, they don't radically change them contrary to what some like to pretend.

Is that really true? I observe that certain drugs impact all personalities in similar ways, like cocaine making people paranoid. If you have homeless near you like most California, you spot opioid or meth drug behaviors instantly because they’re quite distinct. Alcohol does impair judgement, which predictably means less self monitoring and that may explain what you’ve noticed, that jerks get jerkier while nice guys may just get nicer on alcohol.

They key word was "radically". Of course, every drug has a typical and general impact on how people behave and you can even notice it in physical movement (everybody expects any drunk person to have pretty bad motor control). But this is just making my point even more, you need to observe the differences between individual behaviors under the influence, not just the difference between their behavior sober and under influence. A drug will amplify certain key aspects of cognition/movement in the same way for everyone, someone who displays extreme specific behavior is just more noticeable because the amplification makes it very obvious, but it was always there in the first place.

I have never heard about cocaine making people paranoid but it is just something that every drug user displays at some point (because of the fear of being found out, judged and maybe having trouble with the police). Even though I am an extremely chill person, I have found myself to be a bit paranoid under the influence of cannabis at times.

And I have a question for you: is it the drug that makes people paranoid or is it that people who are inclined to paranoid behavior are more likely to use drugs, which amplify the behavior.

People regularly using drugs have issues that push them to this abuse, it's not really the drug that are the problem, the root of the issue is really in the people and their personnality/character.

Yes it's that insane. And Apple is marketing the shit out of their "security".

It's all about posturing and pretending, image is the only thing that matters to Apple.

In the end, locking a hardware device to an online account is just stupid. They marketed it as a tool to prevent theft (and recover if lost) but in reality, it has not prevented theft at all (if anything it has increased as the phones value has ballooned).

Apple is the only one who truly profits the most from this "innovation".

I have had an iPad stolen, and while I could track, it definitely didn't make any difference.

Charitable interpretation is that you are naive, but more realistically it's an incredibly stupid belief.

Apple has played the marketing game around some high-profile cases because they got some incredibly juicy free promotion for it but they collaborate with many governments on a daily basis.

I don't have the link but there is a page out there showing all the requests for data access that are fulfilled by big tech companies. Apple is very much collaborating in the EU, without making a single noise about it.

It's all about marketing and keeping their power. If Apple had any principle they wouldn't even being able to operate in China...

That's hilarious, I got a bit of the same "problem" but with Facebook (I don't use Instagram), but it's generally pretty actress or (for some reason) ballerinas. I'm not gonna lie, I kinda like it.

I have found out that the algorithm will adjust itself relatively quickly if you don't click on stuff (at some point it decided I was into foot fetish and it disappeared quickly). With that I get stuff about philosophy, math (memes), science and technology stuff with a lot of animals videos.

That's probably one reason that business degrades over time. With that type of "requirement" you can't get anyone worth a dam to work for you, past a certain point.

I do have a similar experience and it's almost impossible to find groups of people that value honesty above everything else. That's because truth hurts and is hard to accept (it can also cause all kinds of emotional reactions that may not be desirable).

I think you are attributing too much psychology nonsense on the matter; it's a pretty bad tendency of our times to try to make every behavior some sort of mental illness.

While part of the behavior might look schizophrenic, the reality is that it is that way for plenty of reasons, you being unable to understand/sense them doesn't mean they doesn't exist. Before even going too deep, you can always assume it's some kind of power play or a cheap way to grab attention and support. The people doing this are always working "from behind", because the whole point of it is to gain power without risking a direct confrontation (that could in theory lead into physical altercation or have them loose much more than what they want to bargain for).

I don't like this behavior for many reasons but you can't go around and pretend its mental illness or some nonsense like that; summarizing it as shit talking is a mistake. It's actually the whole point of politics and while you may have an autistic view of the world (no offense intended, I am one) it's how regular people work things out. Not everything can be a perfect competition or a science project with pure facts...

You wouldn't get a collapse, but necessarily a contraction, the pie is getting smaller regardless, having less people to "eat it".

Yes, having a system based solely on positive demography isn't any good. In fact, I would argue that the reverse of this scenario is much worse. No matter what some would like to pretend, ressources are finite on earth and if you have a population big enough that deplete them faster that they can be renewed/recycled it is not good.

In any case I think it's wrong to look at it as a purely economic problem. It seems logical that one should be accountable for one's own retirement.

Previously this was done by having kids, because regardless of the economic situation they could always build on what the parents had and it doesn't take much to support your elder (unless they want a luxurious lifestyle).

Part of the problem is that the old generations (especially the boomers) have re-routed ressource distribution to themselves and you have an overspending on the past at the expense of future building.

The incentive around the providence state and pensions were all wrong in the first place now people are surprised that the results are undesirable (usually the one who advocated for the system).

It's not really a problem of "resistance", it's more about purchasing power, common and avoiding feeling ripped off.

People buy stuff competitively and that's it. There are modifiers, notably being rich enough that regular items prices make no difference to you, so you can buy all from your own country without affecting you too much.

But even if you are middle class, buying most items at a higher price just because they are from your country is just a waste of money from an individual utilitarian point of view. It directly affects people and they always favor that, even if in the long run doing so might have a second order effect that will affect them in worse ways.

Tariffs, taxations and special legislation is actually the only way to make some product competitive for your own country. Especially when they are a participant in the trade willing to take a hit just to corner the market. This is basically what China did for many things, so here we are...

Maybe an EE can rectify the the situation.