Doesn't it leave you shaky? I had similar results but the comedown and the tolerance were deal-breakers. I am completely absent minded but when I take those stimulants it allows me to focus which, I feel, finally puts me on a level playing field with everyone else. It sucks that the drugs have side-effects.
The 5 mg IR (Instant Release) did leave my a little shaky, and I also felt 'high' as opposed to feeling focused. I also felt the 'come down' you mention.
You should try the Adderall XR (Extended Release). Shire, the company that made the original Adderall IR, sold it's IR forumula and now in many ADD forums, people are complaining about the efficacy, salt concentrations etc. The Adderall IR are now manufactured in India, and the Pharma has standing FDA complains against it w.r.t. Quality Control, salt composition and concentration etc.
Shire makes the XR version now. You should try it if your doc can prescribe it for you. My Psychiatrist had me try the IR and then the XR in the lowest possible dose i.e. 5 mg, and it works for me.
Like I said, if you do end up on the Addy XR, do take complete breaks every few weeks. This helps with not developing tolerance, and staying with the lowest does, which will, in turn, keep side effects and long term changes (if any) to an acceptable level :)
How is any of that relevant when the task has never been done before and there is a deadline? They iterated as much as they could given the deadline, past which the kids would die anyway? Fuzzy thinks ng is abound in this topic.
I was going to downvote but the comment is already gray.
Not so unprecedented so as to not involve cave divers and SEAL, no?
It's not like they sent in expert accountants or race drivers to rescue those children. Do you think team Musk or team Divers were the most fit for that mission?
You are confusing yourself. I never spoke about who the most qualified person was for any task whatsoever. That has nothing to do with anything because I don't really think it's in contention who knows more about cave diving. I simply said that rescuing small weak boys who have zero diving experience from miles of submerged cave is basically something that has happened very seldomly. And I am correct.
I said that in relation to my claim that musk wasn't passing up tried and true methods because there were none because this never happens. If you actually have a substantive remark on any of that please let me know.
The success of Norway lies with the intelligence of of it's population. People attribute it to this or that, some institution or policy. But in reality policies and institutions are concievee of, built, and maintained by the sentiment of the people. They are smart people and they will always be well off considering their circumstances as long as that is true. Furthermore, the intelligence and well-being of the population of every country is the sole source of their outcomes. Endless ruminations on other, higher level things are a complete waste of time.
The product of a group of people is a function of the characteristics of the people. This is just a simple fact.
Some people confuse themselves by pointing to education as a contradiction to this. They say that the presence of education changes the product of society, so it's not just the inherant intelligence of people that matters. This is incorrect because as I stated, it is the characteristics of people that matter and education has the effect of improving characteristics. It is the end result of both nature and nurture that then determines how well a society fares. People who have good "nature" are required though, because they end up doing well regardless of education level whereas naturally dumb people need to be force fed an education which leads to a fragile system where any lapse in educational infrastructure leads to prolonged slump in society overall.
There are complicating factors that make my initial observation difficult to find. Power and influence over the product of society is not evenly distributed over the population. This just means you need to take an integral over the influence levels -- if all of the power is in the hands of very intelligent people then everything will be ok even if there are mobs of stupid people. There are many examples of this.
...
Look at gun rights. If we abstract away the gun we can see that it is really responsibility that is being talked about. Is the population up to the task of owning guns without killing other people? This is not very different from the responsibility to own a car or powerful cleaning chemicals or knives or a million other things, or even the vote. Guns happen to be perhaps one of the most damaging rights in the short term. But I no longer ask whether or not people are ready for guns because if they are not ready for guns they are not ready for the vote or the car or raising children. The result I have come to is that everyone in society needs to be up to the task of having responsibility because if they aren't, the country will collapse. Taking away the guns will stop deaths but it won't solve the root of them problem and it won't stop the slow death of the country.
I think that is probably the biggest theme of my idea. Slow, subtle changes that are difficult to attribute to anything are actually influenced by a very simple thing. Lack of good characteristics will result in a slow and nebulous death manifesting itself as failures of institutions and other things. Injecting good characteristics via education, culture or immigration results in fantastic progress in prosperity and quality of life -- all looking like good luck or a magical combination of law and infrastructure.
Edit
And I have to add that there are countless examples everywhere you look. News for example: people blame news companies for publishing misleading, fake, distasteful, etc stories but really it's the people consuming the news who are at fault. If nobody bought or watched that kind and of news then it wouldn't be published. And there are endless examples like that. Most things that are a national embarrassment like that are a result of the people in general supporting it or being apathetic to it.
I used to post rants about how I wanted a laptop that only focused about battery life, crispy graphics and Linux friendliness. Now I find myself wishing I could buy a laptop without CPU vulnerabilities. The hardware market is definitely at it's lowest point ever right now.
This article flat out does not belong on hackernews. It blatently violates not only the guidelines but the culture and values of this place.
I have noticed that this kind of content (inappropriate, not geneder related) is appearing with increasing frequency. I have said it before, this website turns up when you Google "Reddit alternatives." Corrective action is needed if this website is to remain a refuge for intellectuals.
The endless debate about this man undertaking various projects that will improve society if they pan out is absolutely vapid. This doesn't belong here.
Who are you to decide what belongs here? For profit or not, it epitomizes the fact that he is channeling his wealth towards decent course. What have you done for humanity lately?
You are a fool. I am pro musk in this case. The rules of the website decide what is appropriate to post and this does not meet the criteria by any stretch of the imagination. It is a misleading article that touches on an unsubstantive topic that is known to be controversial. It serves no other purpose than to stoke argument.
People literally have stepped over a homeless person to get a closer look at the shop window tv covering this story. It represents the worst of humanity -- TV news swarming the cave site because it's going to get them lots of money. People pretending to care about the welfare of others when it's really a morbid reality television show to them -- entertainment.
