10 hours per month? It’s a start at least.
10 hours per month? It’s a start at least.
Thanks, I guess it was the part where how this caused “malicious harm” given he didn’t reveal any sort of hidden scandal or illegal acitivty but the other user explained it’ll result in patients being afraid to access medical care which is beginning to make sense to me. I’m not based in the US, this is all so alien to me.
Thank for taking the time to lay that out for me. I am unable to comprehend the motives, but that at least starts to explain it. Unthinkable.
Dude forgot his hippocratic oath.
Could you spell it out for me? Genuinely drawing a blank here.
Edit: No need, some kind user came through. Horrifying.
It just says he passed it on to conversative activists, I still cannot begin to understand how this furthers a conservative agenda? The hospital wasn’t doing anything illegal and now he’s looking at a 10 year prison sentence. He committed a felony, threw away his entire career and he didn’t even ‘own the libs’.
If the government wants more babies surely it would be more effective to invest in childcare and a mandatory reduction of working hours to something more manageable?
Elimination? He should be up on terrorism charges. Was he passing the info onto some sort of right-wong militia group?
I still don’t get it though, how does having medical information do anything for his ‘ideology’? Dude committed a felony.
Wouldn’t it be more concerning if it was speeding up?
For what possible purpose would he need medical records? It can’t be money surely.
And when it does, how would you even know?
For now…
Roger Penrose was brilliant, but he got a lot of flack for his Orch-OR theorem which is being alluded to here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction
I’m still don’t understand what problem his hypothesis was trying to solve though.
That seems somewhat unrelated to this paper about foraging societies.
If I can quote the authors:
We caution against ethnographic revisionism that projects Westernized conceptions of labor and its value onto foraging societies.
Fascinating. It doesn’t look like they controlled for height/weight so it’s not surprising that the grip strength of TW was so much higher than for CW. Agree with their conclusion that a larger cohort is needed for a longitudinal study rather than a cross-sectional one.
Well this paper isn’t about intelligence or psychology, it’s about physiology. Reaction times and rhythmic anticipation tests are all quite well-grounded and established tests.
Secondly, I’ve had a brief scan of that 3.5hr long video and dipped in and out of a few places are familiar to me. Straight away I notice she’s reading out the conclusions from the Anderson paper on Hunter-Gatherers that came out last year (to huge media attention) but which was not well received by anthropologists who went through the stats and found the whole thing to be a biased mess (see: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513824000497?dgcid=author). It would unfair to blame the original authors since they were all (and I believe still are) undergraduates and so the PI should’ve been more rigorous. Then I briefly dipped into her ‘debunking’ of the selfish gene where she opens with the astonishing take that bipedism isn’t a heritable trait…this is not the voice of an expert and there are better critiques of the shortcomings in evopsych out there.
I am not familiar with that individual, I assume you don’t mean the musician on YouTube that Google found for me?
Sorry where is the ‘neuroscience’ in the article?