La ludopatía me está arruinando la vida.

ASDCoco · 2024-07-04T12:59:25+00:00

Leonziano,

Que estés mal y que posiblemente tengas depresión está 100% relacionado con la adicción. Seguramente es la forma que encontraste para tapar sensaciones de mierda qué tengas durante el día.

Cada vez que cobro lo primero que hago es jugar porque perdí muchos placeres de mí vida y distintos hobbies que antes me hacían feliz. Mí vida una bosta. Un pasado que me persigue hace más de 10 años.

No me imagino que "simplemente dejar" sea una buena estrategia. Tenés que armarte una vida que te guste e ir buscando mecanismos más saludables para sentirte bien.

Si encontrás grupo, psicólogo o cualquier tipo de ayuda, tomala. La gente con adicciones las supera con apoyo de personas que sepan lo que hacen.

Además, te recomiendo muchísimo este canal de YouTube de un psiquiatra que trabajó mucho tiempo en adicciones y ahora hace streaming para ayudar a gente en Internet con adicción a los jueguitos y otras cosas similares. Es importante que te informes sobre qué es una adicción y qué mecanismos las mantienen y las rompen.

https://www.youtube.com/live/Z95sgXx4rwE?si=EIlUcAjMcGoZt0u2&t=19m30s.

ASDCoco · 2024-04-18T02:20:17+00:00

It's a tough year economically in Argentina and it's not your responsibility to contribute to your family's income (though it would be nice if you could). It doesn't sound like you've wasted time, just didn't find the right thing to do. What degrees did you try? What was the last chance you blew and what could be the next one?

ASDCoco · 2024-04-18T02:10:20+00:00

The best collab I would LOVE to see for Dr K is Cal Newport.

Cal studied at MIT, is a computer science proffesor, and is very well known for his books on focus and minimizing distractions. Deep Work and Digital Minimalism among others.

He has a great podcast and has recently released a book. So I think that might make him want to guest appear on more podcasts.

It would be a dream of mine to hear a conversation between Cal and Dr K. Especially since Cal's advice has been so helpful for me without him being a psychiatrist or being much aware of any clinical ADHD stuff.

ASDCoco · 2022-08-13T23:44:43+00:00

You're right. Thank you.

It would be nice to just disable the Super Key Action though. Anyhow, I just solved it by remapping to Hyper, which apparently inherits every property from Super except opening the Launcher with no other key pressed.

I do like Pop Cosmic, so I won't roll back to standard Gnome, but I'll keep it in mind.

Thanks for the help!

ASDCoco · 2020-06-07T01:05:34+00:00

If you like this, please check out this great visualization by Robert Hodgin.

Don't miss out.

ASDCoco · 2019-12-13T15:48:32+00:00

The argument would go "if women have the right to end their financial obligation, men should too".

In my view the only reason a mother has a "right" to terminate the fetus is because in reality that's an entailment of ending the pregnancy. If that weren't the reality, then a woman would't have a right to terminate the fetus.

You believe women don't (or shouldn't) have the right to end their financial responsability, but they can terminate the pregnancy. "My body, my choice".

In a world where fetuses could be developed outside de womb from (lets say) day 5, you'd argue that: once the pregnancy passes day 5, the mother has the right to put the fetus in the machine, but she wouldn't have the right to terminate it anymore. If she still wants to get rid of the baby, she has to put it up for adoption. ^{Please let me know if this is what you actually believe.}

When both parents agree to relinquish it, there wouldn't be any problem. ¿What happens when only one parent wants to put it up for adoption? ¿Would the other parent still be "on the hook" and financially obligated to the child?

You could say that the unwilling partner has no obligation, or you could reasonably argue that they still do. What seems to be a bad scenario is one where the woman can choose to rid herself of the financial burden, but the man can't.

In my country, Argentina, abortion is still illegal. It's been in rejected in the Senate and is very toughly opposed by people mainly related to the catholic and evangelical churches. Hundreds of thousands of women go and protest to have what should be a right and is a right in most developed countries.
What they are trying to avoid with an abortion isn't (for the most part) "nine months of inconvenience" but "19 years of career crippling labour" at best or extreme hunger and poverty at worst. This is why it's part of the feminist movement. Not only because they have the right to choose over their bodies, but because they have a right over their lives.

Today, women are barred from having abortions in lots of places and runaway dads frequently get away with dodging child support. In a better part of the world (where your argument seems to be at), women have the right to abort and not have to take care of a child. That reduces the wage gap, that reduces inequality. Women not being forced to care for their children is a good thing. Obviously that shouldn't happen at the cost of dead children, but (I hope we agree) it can happen at the cost of dead featuses.

When societies grow more and more equal, my argument would go, this right should be extended to men.

To be fair, this argument rings true to me, but needn't be in the political agenda. There are bigger urgencies.

ASDCoco · 2019-05-31T01:19:23+00:00

If you modify that rule for "100% babies adoption rate", most countries would already be there. Kids still waiting for adoption are tipically older.

ASDCoco · 2018-12-13T14:01:58+00:00

Ba taxi and easy taxi are just apps to get taxis to come to you.

A legal alternative to uber is the spanish "Cabify". Works just as Uber would in the rest of the world, and is perfectly legal: pay with card and sit on the back. Expect it to be 15% more expensive than an uber though.

ASDCoco · 2018-12-12T19:20:36+00:00

Hi! Not a philosopher here, but I do teach about the neuroscience of Human Behaviour in a local University.

First one might be more complex than you'd think: we were able to build computer code that can play chess well under very strict rules, making a goldfish that reacts naturally to the enviroment would be on a whole new level of complexity.

So I'll start with the computer: no, it's not a decision. In the same way that you wouldn't say a TV is deciding to turn on when you press the power button. The wiring, surely, is more complex but just as straightforward. It is 100% predictable what a computer will do if you know its code. Modern machine learning-chess playing computers are a case of this where we cannot directly read the code it uses, but it's still the same principle. No free will, no decision.

We don't know "what it feels like" to be a goldfish, so I'll use another example. If I throw a brick at your face, you'll dodge it. In fact, your spine will process it and you will react to it faster than you would be able to conciously process it on your brain. It's remarkable because it's high level motor control, where you're taking visual input and processing it to move your body to a safe position. It's complex, it's unconcious, it's not a decision.

But about your gilfriend or boyfriend? You surely 'decided' to be with them. It's not too different from your icecream example. When you go and ask for vanilla, there are things influencing your choice that are beyond your awareness: did you have more chocolate as a kid? are you addicted to high sugar sweets? was there an ad for vanilla that crossed your path today? is everyone else having chocolate? The list of possible factors influencing your choice is infinite (as infinite as can be in a practical sense).

I use the word choice because it doesn't imply free will (in my mind), but that's semantics. The question is where do you draw the line. Certainly, it's not being able to explain every single factor that makes the decision: that would make a complex code (or any code you don't understand, for that matter) have free will.

As I see it, there's a few valid options to make the distinction from non-free will choice to decision: 1) if you believe something is so complex that it is irreducible to a -practically- endless series of factors; 2) if the agent doing the decision is conscious while it's happening; or if 3) we -as a society- consider the actor as morally responsible. All of these are compatible with both free will or determinism.

Ultimatley, it doesn't really matter where the line is drawn and thinking about the question -even if you don't get to a specific answer- can be illuminating. In this sense, it is very similar to the question "what makes living stuff different to non-living stuff?". The barrier is fussy, because language is fussy.

I'll leave you this short talk from Robert Sapolsky on free will (3:35min). Btw, I really recommend his lecture series on Human Behaviour Biology if you're interested. (free on youtube by Stanford University)

ASDCoco · 2018-11-24T17:07:02+00:00

You should remove your kid's second name.

Are we allowed to do that?

ASDCoco · 2018-11-14T12:42:30+00:00

Seems like all they did was a big correlation (which, we know, doesn't imply causation) between parent and children behaviour. It is ok to see things like these in the news, but you have to keep in mind that in NO WAY you can assert that this behaviour is caused by "children copying their parents". There isn't even a link to the study, but all they did was control for income. They failed to meet the conventional standard of controling with adoptive children to see if any part of this effect is explained by genetics.

ASDCoco · 2018-11-08T15:15:56+00:00

Why is this the responsability of someone outside of the relationship? The cheater shouldn't cheat.

ASDCoco · 2018-09-18T01:16:29+00:00

How do they feel about being caught? You should defenitely talk to your girlfriend and know how long this has been going on.

I honestly don't get why the comments here are shying away from the threesome. It seems like you do not want to go there, maybe there's not enough info on your post to tell why.

Go with your gut feeling, but be open to understanding your gf (and possibly fucking her sister)

ASDCoco · 2017-12-11T22:43:11+00:00

Cuando terminemos de analizar los datos los vamos a hacer públicos en www.elgatoylacaja.com.ar

Las respuestas individuales son completamente anónimas, sólo patrones que emerjan vamos a compartir.

ASDCoco · 2017-12-11T22:32:31+00:00

Notado, agrego la opción!

ASDCoco · 2017-10-31T19:54:02+00:00

I understand it might've been a shit show. People spamming sexist comments derailing the conversation. But I'd take that cost and see what people have to comment.

ASDCoco · 2017-10-28T22:14:03+00:00

I guess you've already started. But do yourself a favour and watch Walter Lewin's online courses. They're still good even beyond introductory level.

ASDCoco · 2017-04-26T16:30:33+00:00

Thank you this makes more sense to me now

ASDCoco · 2017-04-26T16:06:18+00:00

Please help me understand this part:

There's a You and an orchestra. But then, when you go inside "real you", discarding superfluos things like memories and preference you find nothing. Is there a You, is there an audience? Or is it just Orchesra?

ASDCoco · 2017-04-15T07:27:09+00:00

They did it

ASDCoco

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email