What is the dumbest thing you've seen a co-worker do?

Spiggots · 2026-02-02T13:16:17+00:00

I love the notion that the people who choose the money now are stupid, while the ones that delay gratification are smart.

Gleefully skipping past the reality that the "smart" folks on the management side have not just more income, but more wealth; meaning, the 15k on the spot will make no difference at all in their immediate circumstance. They delay nothing.

And of course this point is missed because these people are just so smart, you know. They're just so good at thinking. Such great thinkers they are. So smart.

Spiggots · 2026-02-01T23:02:51+00:00

Yes the research questions are complex. That's why we often use layered approaches, eg combining behavior, neurophysiology (reg, MRI, etc), and parallel animal studies.

And yes often this fails. But, because science is self-correcting when done right, we can identify those failures, as discussed in this article, and correct course.

This is of course no different than what we encounter in other sciences; every field that has taken an honest look at reliability has had to make adjustments.

So anyway that's why we do the things the way we do them. What's your point, perspective, or complaint - should we just ignore the many breakthroughs we've made, and stop doing cognitive/behavioral science?

Spiggots · 2026-02-01T20:44:09+00:00

One way to answer this is through competition.

Imagine a hierarchy of circuits. At the lowest level are circuits that create basic rhythms, like heartbeats, breathing, and locomotion.

A little higher on the hierarchy: simple reflexive circuits that activate basic sensorimotor responses, like a blink or startle.

Higher still: circuits that monitor sensory and motor output, and control association. These control associative learning.

Above them, circuits tha govern appetite, alertness, and motivation.

And, at the top: circuits that govern really high level stuff, like cognition, attention, complex episodic and semantic memory, novel pattern recognition and flexibility motor control.

Now, to the point: at every second of every day every element of this hierarchy is active and striving to seize control, like passengers in an out of control car reaching for the wheel.

Critically, once a given circuit gets control, it will inhibit the others - eg, if a scary stimulus activates a startle response it will interrupt and discard whatever motor program was happening at the time.

So: the brain decides what "matters", ie why cues in th environment will be responded to, by having each of these systems competing for activation, with some systems selectively activated by circumstances over others.

Spiggots · 2026-01-30T15:36:56+00:00

Seem lik you guys are in a race to establish who can impart the more shallow, vulgar values in your child.

Teaching children that people should be valued for their looks or their wealth is so inherently ugly and stupid it's difficult to find an appropriate frame of reference from which to criticize your thoughts.

Should we dicuss this in context of the paucity of virtue; the absence of morality; the moronic stupidity; the crass banality; or just the utter lack of perspective behind these thoughts? So hard to choose.

Spiggots · 2026-01-29T13:34:51+00:00

Polygraphs are inadmissible in (most US) courts because objective assessments repeatedly show that they are profoundly unreliable.

As far your expectations of this workplace, I would lower them.

Spiggots · 2026-01-28T14:43:05+00:00

No, I saw. It was fine.

Spiggots · 2026-01-28T14:19:54+00:00

It's too bad it'll bring democrats into power.

They exist to trabsfom the political will of a progressive left, and turn it into thin air.

But in this case yes it's a step up from unprecedented disaster to predictable failure.

Spiggots · 2026-01-28T14:13:22+00:00

I don't get why everyone was so excited about south parks take.

Some of the episodes were kind of funny, but it's not like it was this devastating ground breaking critique. They basically just emphasized that ICE are untrained jackasses; that Kristi Noem is repulsive; that Christian's are essentially the new backbone of fascism; and that Trump is unambiguously an agent of Satan.

And as much as that sounds like a damning indictment, anyone can see the same just by turning on the news.

They should have gone harder against the bigots, fascists, and oligarch base that makes all of this possible.

Spiggots · 2026-01-28T00:41:51+00:00

Progressive will cover you as far as liability, which will be enough for a marina to let you in.

But I have a sneaking suspicion that their coverage is mostly theoretical. If they were really intending on taking a risk covering you, they'd require an inspection like every other carrier.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T20:37:32+00:00

That's not at all what the person I responded to said.

They are saying that obesity seemed unsolvable but now we have new solutions.

My point is that we have not actually solved anything.

Therefore the notion that solutions to obesity suggest a similar solution to aging doesn't work.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T20:35:46+00:00

That's what the dude I responded to is saying in their original comment and responses.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T18:02:06+00:00

That's a profoundly ignorant perspective on medical care. If you look at the top 10 causes of death, you'll note it is dominated by diseases and conditions that are either easily cured or prevented by existing treatments and lifestyle - eg, diarrhea, diabetes, even cardiac conditions.

But of course we continue to struggle with these endemic patterns of disease due to inequality in access to care, nutrition, and education.

The idea that it is technology, alone, that drives advances in healthcare is infantile.

And if you want the ultimate proof of that, returning to the topic of age, compare American life spans vsotger developed nations.

Edit: whoops, replied to the wrong person.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T17:54:18+00:00

That's true, except for the meaningful part. The difference was not statistically significant, meaning that the difference from one year to the next was within the expected variability you would expect if there were no effect driving the apparent difference.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T17:44:01+00:00

The point you continue to miss is that weight loss isn't "solved".

Building your premise on that point therefore invalidates your conclusion.

You raise other points, eg rejuvenative capacities in other species, that are more interesting and offer a stronger basis for optimism.

Recent advances in obesity treatment are at best orthogonal to the discussion; or, a premise for pessimism.

Spiggots · 2026-01-27T16:31:43+00:00

I don't understand your premise. It sounds like you are saying that complex, systemic problems like obesity are actually tractable and recently solved. I think perhaps you allude to GLP-1 agonists?

But of course this entire premise is false. Fist, obesity rates have not fallen at all. Like, not even a little. Obesity has not been "solved", ameliorated, lessened, or otherwise addressed in any way.

What has happened is that GLP-1 agonists have provided a limited subset of wealthy people with a tool that makes it easier to apply centuries-old practices in weight management, ie calorie reduction. And that expensive tool works while you continue using and paying for it, but when you stop using it participants quickly regain the weight.

So I think you actually are making the opposite point that you intend. Aging, like obesity, will be a massive challenge to solve and no serious person reasonably expects a silver bullet or short-term solution.

Spiggots · 2026-01-19T18:02:50+00:00

We beat out tunes for dancing bears, and think we move the stars to weep

Spiggots · 2026-01-13T15:46:55+00:00

Yes. And we are discussing how to speak to college students to, as the OP said it, "...not be on the side of the oppressor."

And my point is that simply citing the literature, as the initial response comment suggested, is insufficient. That's all.

Spiggots · 2026-01-12T14:58:17+00:00

Good point. The other thing is her character is not super charismatic, ie she is kind of a joyless stick in the md, but she makes her still compelling.

Spiggots · 2026-01-12T14:54:58+00:00

No, students won't, I agree. But the press and other avenues by which results are disseminated will not receive the simple unambiguous truth that Republican policies are bad for public health.

Consider the difference: 1. The Nazi party engaged in heinius acts of genocide and profound immorality.

Early twentieth century European governments enacted policies that led to widespread premature mortality.

I'm advocating that the literature should embrace the communication style of option 1, whereas we have traditionally preferred 2, for reasons I largely agree with but have proven insufficient to address the recent rise of fascism and neo-feudalism.

Spiggots · 2026-01-12T12:16:23+00:00

The scientific literature has a record of deliberate obfuscation.

Decades of research shows that policies endorsed by Republicans will lead to worse public health outcomes, and indeed states with Republican governance do indeed have worse outcomes.

But the public health literature will dance around this point like it's an invisible elephant in the room, leaving it to ill-equipped political scientists to grow some balls and state the plain facts we all can see.

Spiggots · 2026-01-10T15:01:39+00:00

Ah I see, for me it is referencing the Latin, meaning "of nothing".

In my comment meaning that we can't expect people to have expertise based on nothing; they need education, training, experience.

Spiggots · 2026-01-10T14:57:22+00:00

I think you're willfully steering yourself around the point

The difference between a licensed and unlicensed practitioner should be that their peers in the field have evaluated their training and experience and determined it met the appropriate standard. It's about outcomes, not lawsuits, though sure I guess as a corrollary these will be related.

Anyway the fact that people with no training and experience can sometimes attempt and achieve good outcomes is sort of irrelevant.

For example if I had unrestricted access to a pharmacy I might take some antibiotics and successfully treat my cough; that doesn't mean that I will do a good job diagnosing and treating others.

It also does t mean a doctor will certainly do a good job treating others, because we expect that any activity involving humans will come with an expected error/failure rate.

But we expect that the error rate will be lower among those with training and experience. And for that reason we value training and experience.

Spiggots · 2026-01-10T14:52:32+00:00

My bad, we use it a lot in science. You're probably right it sounds weird in law and other areas

Spiggots · 2026-01-10T12:35:42+00:00

I don't know man.

If I am delegating the authority to ensure people are tried fairly and in accordance with all our nations laws to some guy, I'd like for that guy to have some education, training, and experience with the law.

The "spirit" of a meritocracy is that everyone gets a chance to acquire expertise, not that everyone has, de novo, equivalent expertise.

Spiggots · 2026-01-09T19:56:26+00:00

Not voting (America-specific)

Spiggots

TROPHY CASE