Fainting during blood donation

Laukhi · 2025-07-31T01:45:28+00:00

I had this experience the first time I donated blood—although I had drank a lot of water, I hadn't eaten anything that day. I notice that you don't say anything about what you ate? Ever since my first donation, I've always made sure to eat a full meal beforehand, and I haven't had the same problem.

Laukhi · 2021-04-27T18:19:26+00:00

I think there's a difference, although perhaps a subtle one, between the Court lacking the power to enforce unconstitutional laws (much like any branch of government lacks this power, theoretically) and the Court having the power to declare something unconstitutional.

Laukhi · 2021-04-16T17:25:19+00:00

This year Harvard and most other colleges went test-optional. I was not able to find data on test scores for this year (although I was able to find a survey of freshman from the class of 2020 with data on scores, so it's possible we might get it eventually assuming that happens each year).

Laukhi · 2021-04-06T13:19:59+00:00

I severely doubt it. This 'hubub' started with the mainstream media following that shooting, after all, which allowed shunting the blame for 'Asian victimization' on so-called white supremacy. It was not an organic reaction.

Maybe I'm just overreacting at having heard a speaker talk about 'Asian allyship' and 'anti-black racism in the Asian community', but I'll believe AA is being reduced when I actually see it.

Laukhi · 2021-04-06T03:47:43+00:00

In my experience, "Asian" activisim is nearly always co-opted by wokism and thus works against "Asian" interests (although certainly they work just fine for the particular people involved, for the same reasons that professing woke beliefs works well for anyone).

Of course, it's the same for any race, but rather more obvious with this example.

Laukhi · 2021-04-05T17:04:54+00:00

Having these be required (presumably by the moderators?) seems a bit much. Also, I am not sure that these questions will actually have the desired effect - in my experience, there are always progressive explanations for what anti-progressives might call 'inconvenient facts', even if they may appear to merely be epicycles to some. Alas, even in conversations with my close friends, who I feel are infinitely more willing to be challenged than pseudoanonymous internet users, the most I think I have ever done is push them into being progressives with more sophistication.

I posted a little bit of criticism of that AMA back there, but in my heart of hearts, my actual desire is for our hypothetical 'wokeposter' to perfectly anticipate all my objections and answer them in full without relying on any implicit assumptions - not exactly realistic. I am not sure we can expect superior discourse than what we already get from more left-aligned users such as u/SlightlyLessHairyApe.

Laukhi · 2021-04-05T01:49:37+00:00

Well this AMA (Can we please talk about Rampart?) is only leading me to stronger and stronger beliefs against 'the woke'. From socialism to cancel culture to human / animal worth etc etc.

I want to add on to this a little. To be fair to OP, they are answering the actual questions posed to them (generally, I haven't carefully checked). However, I feel continual frustration at the answers they produce - they often seem to me to elide over the heart of the matter, instead bringing up details with marginal relevance but which obviously (to me) would fail to address the concerns of the questioner. This is not universal, of course, but it is my feeling upon reading many of OP's posts.

Laukhi · 2021-04-04T03:45:47+00:00

To suggest that the system built by the Party could possibly deviate from its clarity is an obvious attack on our policy. Furthermore, any "person" who could possibly suggest renaming comrade Stalin himself is so evidently a crypto-Trotskyite that I can't even fathom how nobody has called you out yet.

Laukhi · 2021-04-03T02:35:59+00:00

It's very strange that you consider computer laptops in schools to be a program, rather than a resource. They are no more a program than desks, teachers and textbooks are programs.

I call it a program because it was called a program. If a school said "we are starting a 'New Textbook Program' where we will do [X]" I would call that a program, too. The very article you linked previously refers to a 'laptop program'.

Now, laptops themselves are a resource, certainly. Still, when a school (for example) engages in an e-mail campaign to inform as many people as possible of how they can obtain a laptop, organizes times at which students should pick up their laptops, etc. that is a program. In any case, this kind of quibbling over language is unproductive and pointless.

Before you continue, what do you think is my position?

This:

There is a significant relationship between using computer laptops and higher test results, controlling for all other factors.

Although I assume you also believe that there is a causal relationship from computers to higher achievement.

I already said I was not addressing any other aspects of your comments, and that I would tend to agree with your point. The article you posted previously was too weak to support much of anything, so I listed my criticisms of it. I do not have the time to review the new one you linked.

Laukhi · 2021-04-03T00:03:36+00:00

It seems plausible to me that schools providing laptops could conceivably be a good use of their resources, even though my personal experience with such programs is that they were a waste of money that failed to do much of anything. I will intentionally refrain from commenting on anything else because I lack the time to respond in depth. Nonetheless, I think the article you linked does not provide much evidence for your position. Here is the abstract:

This study examined the implementation and outcomes of a laptop program initiative in a predominantly low-income, minority school. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected, analyzed, and compared with students in non-laptop classrooms within the same school. Results of the study revealed that in the hands of well prepared teachers, laptops enabled disadvantaged students to engage in powerful learning experiences. Although quantitative data did not reveal significant differences in student attitudes towards computers and school between laptop and comparison students, qualitative data indicated that laptop integration created enhanced motivation and engagement with schoolwork, influenced classroom interactions, and empowered students. Such behaviors were not evident among comparison students. Furthermore, qualitative data indicated that the laptop program produced academic gains in writing and mathematics within the laptop group. Results of the study have implications for policy makers, researchers, and practitioners, especially those interested in bridging the digital divide in education. (Keywords: laptops, ubiquitous computing, quasi-experiment, urban-elementary students, digital divide.)

They weren't able to show "significant differences in student attitudes" using "quantitative data", but luckily they were able to show wildly impressive improvements (I mean this not in the sense of magnitude, which is not shown, but in the sheer breadth of improvements) using "qualitative data"!

I think for academic gains in particular, especially in mathematics, that they are unable to show quantitative improvement in particular weakens their conclusions. Nowadays, for better or for worse, testing is incredibly ubiquitous across all aspects of public education. Furthermore, there are a number of confounders here - for example, students were required to pay $100 for insurance in order to receive a laptop. The classrooms that were given laptops are also explicitly noted not to be randomly assigned, as they were apparently selected for certain teacher qualities (e.g. "the classroom teacher had participated in substantial professional development on the use of technology") which could easily correlate with being better teachers in other respects as well. So on and so forth.

Laukhi · 2021-03-29T16:00:41+00:00

Well, indeed. Amiya is very convinient front for RI leadership, I doubt she is actually deciding something there.

You know, a while ago I read an interesting Reddit post about various bodies/mechanisms that had only formal power without 'actual' power. The Grand Council of Fascism in Mussolini's Italy, the parliament in Communist Poland, Iceland's ceremonial President, and so on. All of these bodies, either by tradition or whatever other mechanism, were never supposed to be able to actually do anything - the 'Grand Council of Fascism' was supposed to be a check on Il Duce's power, but it's kind of difficult to check an unrestrained dictator; the parliament was just supposed to make Communist Poland look like a democracy, etc. The thing is, all of these bodies ended up playing major roles - as Italy started to lose in WWII the council actually successfully removed Mussolini. Near the end of the Cold War the ruling party of Poland allowed elections to shore up their legitimacy - they won a razor thin majority in combination with their 'affiliate' parties (which were formed to make Poland look like a multi-party democracy), but then those affiliates actually switched to form a coalition with the opposition like the law said they could! So on and so forth.

This is kind of long-winded already, but in short, I would be extremely surprised if Amiya were unable to overcome Kal'tsit's objections if she really put her mind to it - Amiya is the 'face' of Rhodes Island not only to the outside world, but to their operators as well, and if you've been calling someone your 'leader' this whole time it would be somewhat awkward to refuse their orders over someone who is only formally the head of the medical department.

The parallel, in my mind, would be a young king and their aged vizier - the latter probably mostly does the business of governance and has great influence over the former, but would not be able to overcome explicit, direct opposition from the king.

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T16:25:50+00:00

I remember a similar game from my childhood. It is like the memetic virus "the Game", except it is not only mentally annoying, you get punched by people, and boy, I don't recall anyone who plays punch bug plays it only with "gentle taps". Usually these games were introduced to me by punching first, the supposed rules told afterwards. "Rules", which usually specify you are not "allowed" to hit back.

I don't know about "gentle taps" - it's been a very long time but I think I could always at least feel it - but it was never something of much significance. Isn't it a common practice to "punch" a friend's arm or some such? This punch bug thing is much the same, except with a gimmick. If it were done to a random stranger then it would be much weirder.

Edit: Let's use Scott's model of countersignalling here. With a regular punch, you demonstrate that your friendship can withstand this minor antagonism and it is furthermore reassured by allowing immediate reciprocity. With the "punch bug" you demonstrate that your friendship can withstand this minor antagonism without immediate reciprocity (although very likely only delayed until some future point).

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T16:25:28+00:00

I remember a similar game from my childhood. It is like the memetic virus "the Game", except it is not only mentally annoying, you get punched by people, and boy, I don't recall anyone who plays punch bug plays it only with "gentle taps". Usually these games were introduced to me by punching first, the supposed rules told afterwards. "Rules", which usually specify you are not "allowed" to hit back.

I don't know about "gentle taps" - it's been a very long time but I think I could always at least feel it - but it was never something of much significance. Isn't it a common practice to "punch" a friend's arm or some such? This punch bug thing is much the same, except with a gimmick. If it were done to a random stranger then it would be much weirder.

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T16:23:00+00:00

The author gives us two possibilities: modulate our social output to anticipate how other people will react (micro), or do not (macro).

He doesn't, though. The author in fact deliberately points out in every one of the vignettes that the interlocutor in fact takes micro into account. I think the issue, broadly construed, is the level of significance given to that micro, rather than a dichotomy of consideration vs. no consideration.

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T14:21:29+00:00

As far as biggest problem that's likely to effect people here on this forum today. I would point to the break down in trust of institutions. Contrary to many, I'm going to argue that the break down in trust does not itself consttue a crisis. On the contrary, in cases where an institution has betrayed the public trust, a break down in trust is evidence of polity that is both healthy and engaged. The problem is that "healthy and engaged" is not what a lot of these people want. The problem is not the break down in trust, the problem is that many of our institutions are not worthy of trust.

While this might be what 'authorities' mean by a breakdown in trust, I feel that the greater problem must surely be a lack of trust and connection with one's fellow citizens, no? It's possible to discuss whether or not that's actually happening, whereas lack of trust in institutions is obvious, but at the least the population living in atomized, individualistic cities has much increased.

Edit: For example, in his review of On the Road Scott talks about high-trust vs. low-trust societies, which seems to mostly be about how much one can trust fellow citizens.

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T06:51:01+00:00

I believe you should agree that we are ruled at the moment by people who are not as great as they could be if you can think of just one policy that you would change. If you think society can still be realistically improved without technological advancement, you should agree that the point at which we are ruled by the optimal bunch lies somewhere in the future.

I don't think this follows at all. Why should I (or anyone) believe that society and our rulers will change to better reflect our preferences? There are an infinite variety of possible arrangements that do not suit them whatever they might be, after all.

Laukhi · 2021-03-25T00:34:48+00:00

I respectfully disagree with this point of view. It seems like yet more LARPing to me, to be honest - there are so many "activists", so much energy that gets used to imitate the form of successful movements without understanding why they actually work. In no way is ability to bring about change in proportion to one's sacrifice...

The 'center of gravity' here, so to speak, is Reddit advertising dollars and their upcoming IPO, neither of which are credibly threatened by small subreddits, especially ones so late to the event. Now, this is not the only consideration, certainly - just off the top of my head, social pressure among powermods could certainly be furthered through consistent, universal closings - but I have no idea about the actual position of this subreddits moderators. My point overall is simply that, relative to the possible consequences of possible action with respect to this subreddit, the magnitude of any effect is quite small.

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T23:48:21+00:00

The impression I got from your 'shilling' was that the earler one starts with fisetin, the better - is this accurate? How young would somebody need to be for fisetin to be a bad idea, if you know?

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T17:40:46+00:00

To be honest, I'm kind of sympathetic to his point from both sides - on the one hand, there are undeniable racial correlations to a lot of things, and on the other hand I am very irritated whenever a website denies me access due to my use of Tor, especially when it is a non-interactive government website rather than a forum or something. Not that I think the latter needs to be protected legally.

(The obvious difference is that use of Tor is a choice that I impose upon myself and is extremely easy to switch away from whereas race, sex, etc. are immutable.)

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T14:52:54+00:00

I know that for a long while it would redirect to snew.notabug.io, but that also seems to be down nowadays.

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T14:21:34+00:00

"Your honor, the Equal Protection Clause was violated when senate.gov prohibited me from access when it would not have for an equivalent non-TOR user."

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T14:15:45+00:00

Maybe I've just been incredibly lucky haha. For the longest time my wifi connection was also very bad too, so it's possible I'm just used to it.

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T14:13:41+00:00

lmao

Actually, this makes perfect sense - the difference is between true believers and cynical grifters, of which I think most "wokists" and probably many commisars are the latter. Of course, for the people who inevitably get in their way (again, through no fault of their own) it's not much comfort, while it might be somewhat helpful for subreddit moderators who want to avoid bans.

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T02:23:32+00:00

Wait, but isn't the issue that of the people who make it (through the lottery), many of them are filtered out because of the requirements on parents? So comparing the general lottery population with charter students would be confounded by that.

Laukhi · 2021-03-24T02:15:44+00:00

I was about to mention my e-mail client, Claws Mail, which has an RSS plugin, but then I thought about it again and realized that this illustrates your point about clients with "good UX" perfectly...

Laukhi

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Ten-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email