Perhaps important to note that this result comes from a lab experiment done on mice, with as far as I can tell N=24 mice split in a control and two treatment conditions. I would be very careful concluding anything from that study about what human males should or should not do.
I don't know how accurate mouse models are for alcohol, but alcohol tolerance varies widely among animals, and even between humans. We have complex metabolic pathways for alcohol, we even get quite a lot of calories out of it. And while both mice and humans are mammals, I guess there are significant differences regarding reproduction too.
So going to a study on mice to some conclusions like: you should abstain from drinking for at least 3 months, and quantitative measurements like "moderate drinking", which, at about 3 drinks/day is more than "moderate" to me.
After a quick look at the paper, there is no such conclusion. When it comes to humans, there is not much more than "maybe it is something worth looking into".
Tell you what though, I drank more than I should have most of my adult life and now have a kid with a single point mutation that'll affect her in all sorts of ways and I will never stop thinking about whether or not this could have been avoided by not drinking.
I am as happy as anyone about arrogant half-smart crypto bros being called out as the frauds they are.
It is still sad that a young person's life is taken away today. I don't think any type of nonviolent crime should get anyone a life sentence, especially not in a prison system as inhumane as in the US.
Revenge isn’t cool, but it did just get that much harder to become a crypto-bro-ponzi-scheming-asshole, of which SBF is the biggest x dumbest kind.
But if we’re so worried about individual lives, like SBF’s life in prison, what can we do to save the lives that he’s ruined?
Help me understand how letting SBF off the hook could be a net positive for society or how he could begin to repay his debt without indulging in similar activities.
My intuition was the same, but they are doing this the way you should: Pre-registered, sufficient N for small effect sizes, comparative across countries. I'm not so sure it does not replicate.
attention-grabbing headline combining a hype topic and a controversial topic... published in PNAS... and it's about priming... doesn't inspire confidence.
I am skeptical of "professional" founders. How can you come up with useful and feasible products in a couple of weeks without any deeper knowledge about markets, demand, etc.? To me this sounds mostly like business school kids throwing around buzzwords.
Some are just good salespeople. Selling is a large part of gaining traction. I think a lot of good salespeople go out with an idea, try to sell it to potential customers, come back with feedback on what the potential customers actually need and adjust the product accordingly. Being able to get your foot in the door with a lot of potential customers is a very valuable skill. You don't need the world's greatest idea when you start.
Maybe I used the wrong word. What I mean is this: Jobs and Wozniak started Apple because they were passionate about computers and had a vision about how they should be built. Page and Brin wrote their dissertation on PageRank and related topics before they started Google.
The people in the article seem to want to be entrepreneurs first, and think about actual business ideas after.
