[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Something you've done your whole life that y...
___________________________________________________________________
Ask HN: Something you've done your whole life that you realized is
wrong?
I was helping my son learn to write and realized I've been holding
the pencil wrong when I write. When I changed my grip to match how
my son was learning, it was more comfortable. What have you learned
that is different and better than something you've always done?
Author : coreyhn
Score : 538 points
Date : 2023-01-30 13:16 UTC (9 hours ago)
| unzadunza wrote:
| For 30 years I sang "whoa-a, head waving" instead of "whoa-a,
| we're halfway there"
| ChicagoBoy11 wrote:
| ooof but the syllables don't match! It didn't make your brain
| hurt??? you just stretched out the -'ing'?
| jerf wrote:
| The term for this is mondegreen:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen
|
| The ones I still hear despite knowing the correct lyrics are
| the first itemized one in the bullet list in that article,
| "there's a bathroom on the right".
|
| My personal favorite one though is "I want to rock and roll all
| night, and part of every day" (instead of "party every day"),
| mostly because unlike most mondegreens it sort of works, but
| changes this confident declaration of desire into a bizarrely
| flaccid one. (Listening directly to the audio in a pristine
| listening environment like I'm in now I don't hear this, but in
| a normal day-to-day environment with other life happening I can
| still hear this.)
| TravHatesMe wrote:
| My friend thought brown eyed girl started with "hey there
| amigo" instead of "hey where did we go"
| unzadunza wrote:
| Ha! This is another one of mine, but I had thought, for a
| while, that it was 'hey there Rodrigo'
| unzadunza wrote:
| And my favorite one from my wife:
|
| A modern day warrior Mean, mean stride Today's Tom Sawyer Mean,
| mean guy
| mooreds wrote:
| Oh wow! I used to think it was "invisible tough shed", instead
| of "invisible touch, yeah"
| jws wrote:
| If when you coil a long cable or hose you find yourself fighting
| a twist as you coil... then you should learn to coil in an
| alternating overhand/underhand style. Google a video. Basically
| when grabbing the next hunk of cable you alternate between your
| thumb pointing away from you down the cable and your thumb point
| back up the cable to you and things just sort of happen right.
|
| When you uncoil the cable it will be laying flat on the ground
| with no twists.
|
| An alternative for massive cables it lay it out in a figure 8 on
| the ground. That will also pay out without twists.
|
| Extension: The upright vacuum cleaner you've been using that
| releases the cord from the handle by twisting the top hook down?
| If it is leaving you with a twisted mess of cord, that means you
| haven't been winding it up in a figure 8.
|
| Even more, since you got this far: Do this with your short cables
| too. Your USB and audio cables will last longer. When you have a
| twisted cable, a torque shows up at each individual wire where it
| meets its connector. The repeated twisting and untwisting leads
| to connection failure.
|
| And when you get a new cable that is rolled up (any Apple cable),
| unroll it instead of pulling the ends apart. Then you cable need
| _never_ have twists put into it.
| allknowingfrog wrote:
| This genuinely makes a huge difference with extension cords,
| garden hoses, etc., but reversing my grip never made this "just
| happen" the way the videos said it would. For anyone else who
| struggles, the main goal is to twist every other loop in the
| "wrong" direction, which negates the previous twist. This still
| forms a spiral shape, but as you create loops, the loose end
| alternates between laying on top of the loop and tucking under
| it. You can accomplish this without reversing your grip if you
| just alternate your twists instead.
| toss1 wrote:
| Yes! And it is absolutely critical in using climbing ropes to
| NOT coil by loop+twist, but double-loops without twisting (to
| the point where it is a firing offense in climbing schools to
| coil w/loop+twist method); it is critical that you can uncoil a
| rope instantly with minimal risk of tangling.
|
| This also works better for air hoses, water hoses, etc. If the
| thing isn't on a winding/unwinding reel, use the double-loop
| method; everything will last longer and you'll save yourself a
| lot of trouble.
| solarmist wrote:
| Yup, this! I learned it from a musician for patch cables.
|
| A quarter twist per loop is all it takes for nicely rolled
| cords your whole life!
|
| Rereading your comment, yours is a more complicated one. I'll
| have to look it up. I've never needed more than a quarter twist
| per loop.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| The wrist only needs to twist a small amount, just enough to
| make the next loop of cable fall the right direction. The
| amount of twist on the cable itself will be greater.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| > _new cable that is rolled up (any Apple cable), unroll it
| instead of pulling the ends apart_
|
| An alternative method is gravity. Hold the cable up by one end
| and let it untwist. Obviously, don't do this for 10 foot (3m)
| cables unless you're very tall.
| heliophobicdude wrote:
| Rinsing after brushing my teeth.
|
| This may be controversial, but keeping the fluoride on your teeth
| as much as possible helps prevent tooth decay. Rinsing
| immediately after brushing dilutes or removes fluoride. What was
| the point? -\\_(tsu)_/-
| bigwavedave wrote:
| Not using a bidet. I honestly feel like the single biggest
| quality of life improvement I've had in my adult life was
| realizing how much of a difference a bidet makes.
|
| That, and using flushable wipes when at home instead of just 100%
| toilet paper.
| solarmist wrote:
| No flushable wipes in the toilet! Those destroy plumbing! If
| you want to use them, then throw them in the trash, not the
| toilet.
|
| Flushable wipes are NOT actually flushable.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Flushable wipes aren't flushable. It's a bit of wishful
| thinking on the part of marketers. They really do clog sewars.
| tapanjk wrote:
| I always thought I need to exercise [more] to lose weight. Wrong.
| For all practical purposes, to lose weight you must change what
| you eat.
| hinkley wrote:
| You can lose weight exercising, if you're willing to give up 3
| hours a day to do it.
|
| Actors are getting paid to work with a coach who is putting the
| through weight or strength regiments that are a part time job.
| It works for them because it's all they're doing.
|
| If you want to walk or bicycle three hours a week then no, you
| aren't going to lose weight from exercise.
|
| You can burn a couple thousand calories in a day by walking or
| biking or running, but it's going to color your whole day.
| dennis_jeeves1 wrote:
| Great one. Not many people know this, or will even think it's
| nonsense. Exercise is overrated. What you eat is really, really
| important.
| timeon wrote:
| It is just calories in calories out. Exercise may help with
| that. Depends how much you eat.
| ravishi wrote:
| I have always taken my good relationship with my father for
| granted. Not sure how to properly express this in english, but I
| don't remember having issues with him. We were present in each
| others' lives but while at the same time not connected.
|
| Yesterday while visiting him it just struck me like a lightning
| strike that I had no connection with him. Our world views are so
| fundamentally different that I might have disrespected him by
| some honest mistake. It was a difficult realization to process,
| but I feel like there's no going back from this.
|
| Something very deep inside has changed. I spent the night awaken
| next to my toddler thinking how I want a different fate for our
| own relationship, while at the same time having no clue how to
| even bring this up to my father. He expects something from me
| that I just can't (and don't) want to give.
|
| Still, I think this is progress, somehow.
| mtlynch wrote:
| Staying warm.
|
| In the winter, I used to stay warm by turning up the thermostat.
| Then I discovered (via HN) the Low-Tech Magazine article,
| "Insulation: first the body, then the home." [0] The article
| argued that it's much more efficient to focus on heating yourself
| rather than your whole living space.
|
| I invested in high-quality wool clothes that I wear in layers and
| warm slippers. Now, I keep my home about 5 degrees F cooler than
| I used to for the same comfort, and it's a big reduction in oil
| and wood consumption for home heat.
|
| [0] https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/02/body-insulation-
| ther...
| btdmaster wrote:
| See also this article from "Mr. Electricity". [1]
|
| [1] https://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/heating.html
| koonsolo wrote:
| I have a problem with my hands. They are always cold when
| working on the computer.
| dflock wrote:
| Heated desk pads are a thing, they will fix this issue.
| rompic wrote:
| You need this calculator:
| https://comfort.cbe.berkeley.edu/?eyJ0YSI6MTgsInRyIjoxOCwidm...
| balaji1 wrote:
| austerity
| xsmasher wrote:
| Efficiency.
| ttpphd wrote:
| Big dad energy
| james_pm wrote:
| "Staying warm" being the key! Your body generates plenty of
| heat. The idea is to trap it.
| mabbo wrote:
| I don't _like_ wearing big layers of clothing. I _like_ being
| in a very light t-shirt.
|
| I'm happy to pay the extra cost to heat the room I'm in with a
| space heater in the winter time.
| triceratops wrote:
| That's still better than keeping the whole house at 75F all
| winter.
| phyzome wrote:
| I _like_ eating chocolate and sleeping all day, but I also
| have responsibilities. One of my responsibilities is to not
| be wasteful. So I put on a sweater.
|
| (But if you've got some kind of super-insulated house, then
| never mind.)
| armchairhacker wrote:
| me too, also sometimes i can't seem to heat up in layers. So
| I drink hot tea instead
| beerandt wrote:
| I'm the same way, but wool really is an awesome fabric for
| clothes wrt to temp regulation.
|
| My favorite t-shirt is now a lightweight filson 100% wool
| shirt that is just as comfortable by itself at 80 deg as it
| is under a button up shirt at 30 deg.
|
| And doesn't get cold when wet like cotton does.
|
| It really does fit the "life changing" topic if you've never
| tried it.
| Wistar wrote:
| I just went and bought a Filson 210G Merino wool T. Thanks!
| I need this.
|
| https://www.filson.com/tops/210g-merino-wool-short-sleeve-
| cr...
| ornornor wrote:
| It's so itchy though.
| seadan83 wrote:
| Pre-Merino, wool was quite itchy. I wonder if you are
| thinking of "old" wool. Modern merino is some very soft
| stuff.
|
| > Merino wool is able to ditch the itch thanks to its
| fiber's smaller diameter, or being "finer". These fibers
| are more flexible and softly bend when pressed against
| the skin and, therefore, don't itch like other wool.
|
| https://www.smartwool.com/discover/why-merino-
| wool/merino-wo...
| ornornor wrote:
| Could be. Wool is too cruel for my taste anyway so I
| abstain from it.
| seadan83 wrote:
| No could be about it. Merino wool is not itchy.
|
| There are other wools like possum wool with similar
| properties that are less ambiguous in terms of ethics.
| Merino can be ethically sourced.
|
| If usage of animal products is a concern, that seems
| hardly relevent to a question of the feel of the
| material. I applaud the concern, just find the "could be"
| to be glib and/or ignorant
| gambiting wrote:
| Yeah so I was like that, until the energy prices absolutely
| exploded here in UK. I realized that if we go like this we'll
| pay PS600/month just in energy costs, and that's as much as
| our mortgage payment - and frankly that's insane. I turned
| our thermostat down, grumbled and put on a jumper and wooly
| trousers - that alone literally halved our bill to
| PS300/month - still insane(considering last year we were
| paying PS100/month even in winter with heating being on
| pretty much all the time), but managable.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| You can still do this efficiently, for example my house
| thermostat is set to 65ish and I use a tiny space heater at
| half power (700ish watts) to have a small but nice warm
| corner without breaking the bank, probably.
| coldpie wrote:
| I'm not trying to change your mind, just offer my
| perspective. I felt the same way. But after a couple of
| months of just putting up with it, I found I got used to it,
| and it saves some money & spends less fuel. Now I wear
| sweaters around the house all the time and it doesn't bother
| me anymore.
| bumby wrote:
| You're right and I've done the same. But changing human
| behavior is enormously difficult, especially when it relies
| strictly on individual decisions. Just look at how many
| people rationally know what to do to get healthier, yet are
| unable to do so. We need to stop pretending humans are
| computers that just need better information to make better
| decisions. We're emotional beings even more than we are
| rational ones.
| h2odragon wrote:
| I sweat a lot (medical problems), and have no body fat; so
| keeping warm is a real challenge. I can't wear much clothing.
|
| "radiant IR" (red glowing elements) type heaters are
| _wonderful_ tools for heating the body instead of the air.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| _it 's a big reduction in oil and wood consumption for home
| heat_
|
| _I 'm happy to pay the extra cost_
|
| As an aside, we've got the externalities of climate change
| all wrong. Oil is a non renewable resource. We can't just
| give the planet a bunch of money and have it produce more oil
| for us to burn when we're uncomfortable. This cost is not
| really borne by you; it'll be borne by future generations.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Yeah but I don't like future generations, my dude. I like
| me. And so does everyone else. So I'd rather pillage the
| commons because if I do otherwise the commons won't be
| unpillaged. It'll just be pillaged by others.
|
| Everyone's all "we must care about the environment" but
| then you ask them why Germany isn't reforesting (after
| razing the cities they built on old forests) and why Europe
| is deforesting at an accelerated rate and it's all this and
| that.
| hgomersall wrote:
| The commons is an interesting point. It was stable for a
| long time through very strong social and cultural norms.
| It was broken essentially by wealthy landowners taking
| slices of it and then using their oversized influence to
| change the law to support them. It suggests the root of
| the solution to any of this stuff is very much cultural
| and social.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| Do you need the oil more than OP and for what purposes?
| melenaboija wrote:
| I would assume the poster already knows it. Is a matter of
| _wanting something_ and _do it because I can_.
|
| It goes against common sense but is human nature.
| notyourwork wrote:
| Which is precisely why government intervention is
| required to address this problem. Individuals will make
| decisions that are short sighted, self-centered and
| potentially not in the best interest of the planet.
|
| I don't fault them for it, I'm guilty of it in some
| situations.
| bumby wrote:
| It's a hard balancing effort. On one hand, humans can't
| be counted on to be rational actors, especially in terms
| of long-term benefit. On the other hand, the system is so
| complex it may not be able to be managed well at the
| large government level.
| 988747 wrote:
| No, it actually makes sense: burn all the oil now, to
| keep yourself warm in winter, and the future generations
| will be kept warm by the fact that climate change raises
| temperatures, so there are no winters anymore :-D
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| Boo. A single day of any large company impacts the
| environment far more negatively than the most wasteful
| single human or large group of humans do in their
| lifetimes.
|
| Moving the blame from corporations to the individual is how
| companies have avoided doing anything to combat climate
| change and only serves to make the individuals who do the
| blaming self righteous and the ones being blamed bad.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| I didn't move anything.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| No blame is being moved. Corporations behaving
| irresponsibly has no bearing on whether or not
| individuals should behave responsibly.
|
| In fact, the person trying to shift blame here is you: by
| downplaying the smaller yet still significant role of
| individuals in a sustainable future.
| kortilla wrote:
| My home isn't heated with oil. Take your shitty
| generalizations elsewhere.
| scotty79 wrote:
| I don't think it's consumer's duty to factor in that future
| cost into their behavior. This should be factored into the
| current price of the resource by businesses or governments.
|
| It's not customer's duty to pay more than they are asked,
| either in money or in inconvenience.
| tremon wrote:
| But I tend to think of my fellow beings as citizens
| rather than consumers. And I do think it is a citizen's
| duty to be considerate of their fellow and citizens,
| current and future.
| scotty79 wrote:
| It's a bit like you'd say: I prefer to think about my
| fellow beings as mammals not consumers. They sure are but
| that's beside the point.
|
| Citizen has no meaning in context of economy (except for
| taxation). So using it in context of economic activity
| mixes up two unrelated things.
|
| Bad actors in the economy tend to exploit such mix ups to
| shift the burden away from them.
|
| Read up on introduction and promotion of the concept of
| individual carbon footprint. Or the reality of recycling
| which was promoted as alternative to producers of plastic
| being directly responsible for introducing plastic into
| the environment.
| Georgelemental wrote:
| While our oil supply is not part infinite, it should still
| last many decades/centuries more, by which time we will
| hopefully have alternatives. Climate change is a larger
| risk than running out
| pwinnski wrote:
| Among our alternatives: wear warmer clothes.
| hooverd wrote:
| Or through the magic of south facing windows and proper
| insulation you can be nice and warm in the winter and with
| electric heating not even burn oil.
| mrshadowgoose wrote:
| A large part of the population is like this. Whining at and
| shaming them is not going to get the result you want.
|
| If you care about climate change, you should be advocating
| for completely green electricity generation, and carbon-
| neutral synthetic fuels. That would completely solve the
| fundamental problem.
|
| Our society is fundamentally based on energy, and people
| like to use energy towards things that give them comfort.
| Taking away comfort is going to be a "nope" for most
| people.
| Spivak wrote:
| And even stronger, everyone is and _should_ be like this.
| Everything takes energy and I bet almost everything in
| your house is technically unnecessary and for your
| comfort. Trying to police all uses of energy into good
| /bad is just a reflection of your own preferences of the
| things you can personally live without without too much
| of a quality of life drop.
| bumby wrote:
| If everyone gets to decide and spend to their own
| independent value system, can you agree that
| externalities should at least be priced in?
| aisengard wrote:
| We price in externalities all the time. A lot of the time
| it's priced in as the cost of complying with government
| regulation, like food safety and labeling. Other times
| it's priced in the other direction, like subsidies for
| green energy or particular crops (corn/ethanol). We just
| don't necessarily price them appropriately, or in a way
| that some people may think is accurate, but we certainly
| don't ignore the concept of externalities.
| bumby wrote:
| Absolutely. I wasn't making case that we are always
| ignoring them. But I think there are some subset of cases
| where we don't price them in proportionally to
| consumption. One example apropos to this thread is
| pricing in atmospheric carbon (or the externalities of
| extracting/protecting those resources). Based on your
| reply, I'm assuming you think regulation is a suitable
| way pricing in externalities?
| Spivak wrote:
| Absolutely 100%!
| bumby wrote:
| What are the better mechanisms to do so in your opinion?
| titzer wrote:
| > A large part of the population is like this. Whining at
| and shaming them is not going to get the result you want.
|
| It's unfortunate, but it does appear to have the opposite
| effect on some section of the populace. They just get
| pissed off and consume more out of spite. One thing to
| temper that is to massively tax (over-) consumption. Use
| taxes tend to be regressive, so to avoid targeting the
| poor, there needs to be some thought put into the tax
| structure.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| If one reads my comment and construes it as whining and
| shaming, I don't think we're dealing with reasonable
| people. The problem is that conservative politicians like
| MTG make this ID pol issue, vis a vis her comments about
| Pete Buttigieg and EVs being emasculating. Because of
| these influences, they see any attempt to curb fossil
| fuel use as a personal attack, even if it isn't.
| lucb1e wrote:
| > The problem is that [politics]
|
| If politics is the issue, let's not start about politics
| and partisanship? I don't know much about USA politics
| but it seems to me that this automatically turns your
| comment into something to ignore and dismiss for
| precisely half your population, as they're part of the
| party you're blaming as a whole (which might or might not
| be a fair thing to do).
| dfxm12 wrote:
| It's not just politics, and I did specifically mention
| the attempt to make this about ID politics. In politics,
| there's discussion, there's give and take, OK. But when
| one uses their power from the top down to convince their
| constituency: using fossil fuels is a part of who you
| are, and _they_ are trying to take a piece of your
| identity away from you, then it becomes something
| different.
| mrshadowgoose wrote:
| When one decides to pass over clearly defined technical
| solutions that actually solve the problem, and instead
| decide to shame those who live differently than them,
| perhaps that individual isn't a bastion of reasonableness
| themselves.
|
| Clean energy production is an everyone problem. I'd
| encourage not letting politicians pit you against other
| parts of the population, which is just an emotionally
| satisfying substitute to actually addressing fundamental
| problems.
| piva00 wrote:
| It's not an either option though. If one can't have 100%
| clean energy right now, spending a lot more of non-
| renewable energy resources just because "I like to be in
| a t-shirt while it's -20C outside" doesn't sound very
| reasonable.
|
| You can both work with the current reality, where energy
| produced by non-renewable means should be used with more
| thought while advocating for a better solution for the
| future so you can have your luxury of heating the house
| to 25C if you so wish and can afford to...
|
| I agree on not letting politicians pit one against other
| parts of the population, I also believe that people
| should take responsibility and be mindful of the luxuries
| they want and what's the cost to the general society, not
| only that you can afford to do it even though it's
| detrimental to others.
| mrshadowgoose wrote:
| > It's not an either option though.
|
| Although I agree that it isn't, in practicality most
| people do actually think that way, and have room in their
| heads for only one approach to a given problem.
|
| And many people, for whatever reason, tend to prefer
| "solutions" that involve hating on some other part of the
| population. Politicians use this to great effect to avoid
| actually addressing problems.
|
| This is the reason I so strongly advocate for focusing on
| fundamentals instead of the limited-return shame-based
| approaches.
| sgt101 wrote:
| Making it mind blowingly expensive seems to have worked
| at treat in the UK.
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/322996/monthly-
| electrici...
| tasuki wrote:
| You are of course right shaming is not going to help.
|
| > completely green electricity generation
|
| The problem with green electricity is that there is no
| such thing as green electricity.
|
| The wind turbines? Massive blocks of concrete in the
| ground, heavy machinery to put it in, lifespan not so
| great. Solar? Destabilizes the grid, takes plenty of
| minerals to produce, do you know what happens with solar
| panels after their lifespan?
|
| The only "green" electricity is one that isn't even
| produced to begin with.
| mrshadowgoose wrote:
| In this context, "green" means carbon-neutral, which (the
| lack of neutrality) is generally accepted as the
| dominating "bad" factor with how humanity harnesses
| energy today. Anything else is goalpost moving. But I'll
| entertain the goalpost moving nonetheless.
|
| > The wind turbines? Massive blocks of concrete in the
| ground, heavy machinery to put it in, lifespan not so
| great. Solar? Destabilizes the grid, takes plenty of
| minerals to produce, do you know what happens with solar
| panels after their lifespan?
|
| These are all things that can be recycled given the
| correct application of energy. Not profitably as a
| standalone enterprise of course, but energetically
| positive in comparison to what a given installation
| produces in its lifetime. Therefore the added cost can be
| baked into the final cost of the energy produced.
|
| > The only "green" electricity is one that isn't even
| produced to begin with.
|
| Most of us don't care for your extreme version of
| "green", so I'll point back to my original comment.
| You're not going to be able to convince people to
| willingly give up comfort, so focus on reducing the
| impacts of people deciding to live that way. "Much
| better" is worse than "perfect", but "much better" is
| still better than what we're doing today. You're not
| going to get "perfect" unless humanity is wiped out
| completely.
| baal80spam wrote:
| Highly recommend this enlightening book on the subject
| (among others): https://www.amazon.com/How-World-Really-
| Works-Science/dp/059...
| [deleted]
| gruez wrote:
| >As an aside, we've got the externalities of climate change
| all wrong. Oil is a non renewable resource. We can't just
| give the planet a bunch of money and have it produce more
| oil for us to burn when we're uncomfortable. This cost is
| not really borne by you; it'll be borne by future
| generations.
|
| What's the point of resources if they're not consumed? If
| we follow your advice to its logical conclusion, then we'd
| have oils that are consumed by nobody, because every
| generation doesn't want to consume it for fear of "cost
| [...] borne by future generations".
| dfxm12 wrote:
| _If we follow your advice to its logical conclusion, then
| we 'd have oils that are consumed by nobody_
|
| That's not really the logical conclusion of my advice. In
| actuality, there's a lot of possibilities between "I'm
| the one buying it, so I'm the only one dealing with the
| consequences" and "Not use any oil at all". But I get it,
| it's easier to argue against strawmen.
| gruez wrote:
| >But I get it, it's easier to argue against strawmen.
|
| It's also easier to feel smug and accuse people of
| strawmanning when you're engaging in motte and bailey :^)
|
| Accusations of fallacy aside, what is your actual
| argument then? That there's some non-zero harm inflicted
| on future generations when we consume fossil fuels,
| because they won't be able to use them anymore? That
| would seem like the motte argument, because it's
| trivially true, but what does this translate in terms of
| how we should behave? A cost of $0.000001 would be
| trivially easy to defend, but also means I can turn my
| thermostat to 78F guilt free.
|
| You also argue that we've "we've got the externalities of
| climate change all wrong", implying that the future
| generations not being able to use fossil fuels is somehow
| _worse_ than people being displaced by climate change
| today. What is your basis for that?
| bumby wrote:
| > _What 's the point of resources if they're not
| consumed?_
|
| Just to add some nuance, this seems to imply everyone has
| the same environmental psychology. There are lots of
| (often competing) perspectives. If you have a utilitarian
| environmental psychology, you may think resources are
| there to be consumed for human benefit. If you instead
| have a stewardship environmental psychology, you may feel
| its your duty to protect those resources from being
| pilfered.
|
| Stephen Kellert has a good description of these different
| perspectives in "The Biological Basis for Human Values of
| Nature". Some of his categories include: utilitarian,
| naturalistic, ecologistic-scientific, aesthetic,
| symbolic, humanistic, moralistic, dominionistic, and
| negativistic. Other researchers define the human-
| environment interactions differently. For example, [1]
| defines them in terms of master, apathy, steward,
| partner, participant, and user. So it's not hard to see
| why people's thoughts differ on this issue. Like with
| most human value systems, it's not likely that there is a
| singular "right" perspective.
|
| [1] https://www.academia.edu/download/53480185/Yoshida_et
| _al._20...
| atemerev wrote:
| We have enough uranium to last for millions of years at
| current consumption levels, and nuclear energy is nearly
| completely CO2-free. Electric heating is a thing. I don't
| think we need to worry about this.
|
| (Using oil for heating is outrageous, of course; as
| Mendeleev have said, it is exactly the same as heating your
| fireplace with money bills).
| bumby wrote:
| Fossil fuel heat generation is an order of magnitude
| cheaper per unit than electric in many geographic areas.
| chordalkeyboard wrote:
| > We have enough uranium to last for millions of years at
| current consumption levels
|
| this is because we don't use very much nuclear power.
| There is currently enough known uranium reserves to
| provide 2 years of global energy production at current
| rates.
| Schroedingersat wrote:
| That's one to two hundred years depening on if you
| include inferred resource, and for supplying under 3% of
| the energy. Meeting net zero targets with PWRs would run
| out in well under a decade, perhaps not even a single
| fuel load.
| hooverd wrote:
| Which currency is the best heat source? I think some of
| the newer ones might give you cancer.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| > We can't just give the planet a bunch of money and have
| it produce more oil for us to burn when we're uncomfortable
|
| Yes, but we can try to do something about those "Green"
| activists who prevent the proliferation of the cleanest
| power on Earth: nuclear energy. Look at what did they do to
| Germany!
| Teknoman117 wrote:
| True or not, I would totally believe that the people who
| are so anti-nuclear they don't want any further research
| done into the subject are probably being funded by the
| fossil fuel industry.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Just a few links I gathered some time ago when discussing
| the related topic:
|
| "Has Russia Been Financing Western Environmentalism?"
| (2022) [0]
|
| "Putin Is Funding Green Groups to Discredit Natural Gas
| Fracking" (2017) [1]
|
| "German green group branded a Russian 'puppet' over Nord
| Stream II gas pipeline" (2021) [2]
|
| [0]: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18330/russia-
| funding-envi...
|
| [1]: https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-
| discredi...
|
| [2]: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-
| group-brande...
| Schroedingersat wrote:
| > Look at what did they do to Germany!
|
| Increased low carbon energy by more than the first twelve
| years of the messmer plan in spite of being betrayed by
| the SDR immediately and then having the conservatives cut
| funding further?
| pandemicsoul wrote:
| Green activists are the only reason we have any green
| energy at all.
| SamPatt wrote:
| This I highly doubt. Especially when it comes to solar,
| for which there are many reasons to adopt apart from
| environmental concerns.
| Firmwarrior wrote:
| Well, if it weren't for green activists, we'd probably be
| exclusively using nuclear power at this point, so we'd be
| in a much better spot for green energy
| tomp wrote:
| No, we got the technology all wrong.
|
| We could easily have abundant nuclear energy so that "home
| heating" would be a non-issue and trivial cost.
| Schroedingersat wrote:
| For about 10 years and 100 trillion dollars.
| eadmund wrote:
| I _like_ going outside. I _must_ go outside to walk my dog,
| get my mail and go to church -- all of which are outside. I
| _like_ shopping for groceries and eating out, which means
| that I _must_ move from my car to the building. Given that I
| am going to be outdoors, it sure as heck makes sense to dress
| for the season and the weather.
|
| Plus, y'know, winter clothes are the best clothes. Tweeds,
| woolens, gloves, coats, scarves, hats: all these are great!
|
| I was amazed to find out that even in this air conditioned
| age we spend far more heating buildings than air conditioning
| them (four times as much, according to the first Google hit I
| just found). That means that it makes a lot more sense to
| dress warmly in the winter than lightly in the summer.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| Add moisture to the air also as it conducts heat better and the
| same temperature will "feel" warmer. (especially important in
| some climates more than others)
| odiroot wrote:
| Perfect recipe for growing mold :)
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| Not where many people live. In winter here the air is so
| dry you need to run humidifiers or your skin starts to
| crack.
| hkpack wrote:
| This is probably a bad advice - As it simultaneously makes
| cold air feel colder.
|
| Also, I'm not sure if there is an easy way to actually
| increase humidity without reducing the temperature. From my
| experience, increasing humidity while keeping the overall
| temperature at the same time requires additional energy.
|
| Also, less humid air may allow you to actually wear less
| cloths as it is more difficult for the air to get energy off
| your body.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| I think is true for places that have moist air already. But
| for colder climates a house with central heating the air
| often gets drier (even outside) than the worst deserts on
| earth.
|
| So, in that environment adding moisture makes the air
| warmer. (with proper heating of course)
| number6 wrote:
| Is this the reason for infusions in sauna?
| chupasaurus wrote:
| Sauna temperatures are higher than human body's.
| mtlynch wrote:
| I didn't know that. Good tip!
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| Based on the comments above, I think I should have
| specified that this works well for very cold places that
| get very dry air in the winter.
| peteradio wrote:
| Sorry this is backwards isn't it? In air temperature of lets
| say 60*F the conduction would be away from your body into the
| air, wouldn't you want to reduce the conduction? I can say
| that we used to humidify our winter air throughout the house
| but it made it feel so much colder. Now we humidify our
| sleeping air only.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| It depends, with super (I mean very, very dry air) you can
| have pockets of warmth just around the heat source. But add
| a little moisture and the whole room feels warm.
|
| In my experience 60 is cold no matter what. But feeling
| cold at 70 degrees stinks.
|
| In England or Ireland? Ya, damp all the time all winter. It
| just depends on the environment. (don't want anymore
| moisture in the air)
| jessekv wrote:
| Unless your air temperature is higher than your body
| temperature (37 deg C), won't higher humidity mean more of
| your heat is lost? This is why we call desert climates 'a dry
| heat' or 'a dry cold' in winter. Conversely, a 'damp cold'
| might not be that low a temperature, but you really feel it.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| This was in context to someone in a house with proper
| heating, but still feeling cold.
| tashoecraft wrote:
| Electrically heated clothing is now becoming readily available,
| and I think it could have a big impact on home heating if
| people would come around to it. I'm able to keep my office much
| colder, but wear a heated vest. Why heat the whole room when
| I'm the only thing that wants to be warm in it? If the clothing
| was all integrated, in theory I could be kept at my ideal
| temperature at a nominal electricity cost.
| theGnuMe wrote:
| Keeping my hands warm is a bigger problem.. especially when
| having to type on the computer..
| gms7777 wrote:
| I have chronically cold hands (to the point that they're
| painful and interfere with typing), and in the last few
| years I've discovered that hands down the best way to warm
| my hands up is to warm my core up more. I have a big down
| puffer vest that I keep in my office and it's a lifesaver.
|
| This works even when my hands are the only part of my body
| that feel cold. The body is effectively prioritizing
| keeping my core warm instead of the extremities, so adding
| insulation to the body has the trickle-down effect of
| warming the hands. On the other hand, trying to warm just
| the hands never feels like enough.
| ajolly wrote:
| Absolute best thing I've found has been silk glove liners,
| and then cutting the tips off to make them fingerless. For
| some reason almost all the fingerless gloves you can buy
| cover half of the finger, not 3/4 of the finger.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| I tried this but they get frayed at the ends, so you end
| up looking like a hobo digging in the trash. Ended up
| with some compression/arthritis gloves and they are just
| the right size, sewn at the ends, reach up to the last
| digit. But unfortunately they are made of some fabric
| that tries to minimize heat retention. So they only help
| a bit. Probably could be paired with the normal wool
| fingerless gloves.
|
| Another factor is to keep the material thin between the
| fingers or it affects typing. Wish I could design my own
| (sigh).
| ryanianian wrote:
| My desk is next to a huge window, and even with the heat on
| my hands get really cold. But then I got a heated desk pad
| / mousepad. I thought it was a gimmick, but I love this
| thing. In just a few minutes it warms up my hands and
| wrists and keeps both my keyboard and mouse at cozy temps.
| bityard wrote:
| Wow, I did not know these were a thing.
|
| My main issue in the winter is my feet. (And I hate
| slippers.) Maybe I'll get one of these and put it under
| my desk.
| losvedir wrote:
| Aw man, slippers are the best part of winter! Maybe you
| just haven't had nice ones. In addition to the usual
| furry/fuzzy slippers most people think of, I like to mix
| it up with "house shoes" (i.e.: shoes but ones that never
| go outside) like EVA Birkenstocks[0]. They're extremely
| light and the half-inch insulation they provide from the
| cooler ground makes a big difference for me.
|
| [0] https://www.birkenstock.com/us/arizona-
| essentials/arizona-ev...
| uh1 wrote:
| I used to have a small heater running under my desk but I
| bought these [1] recently and the heater hasn't been on
| since. My feet are toasty but don't get hot and sweaty.
|
| [1] - https://www.thenorthface.com/en-
| us/sale-c829803/mens-thermob...
| jwatt wrote:
| Personally I find "wrist warmers" work well. I don't like
| fingerless gloves when typing since material between my
| fingers is annoying, but wrist warmers are like fingerless
| mits (no individual finger holes).
| RugnirViking wrote:
| I managed to get some fairly thin gloves that worked well
| on laptop keyboards these past few months when ive been
| testing outside in negative celcius tempratures & snow (I
| work in mobile robotics, testing outside is common enough
| the company has camping chairs with umberellas etc for us)
|
| something like these https://www.primark.com/en-
| gb/p/thinsulate-knitted-gloves-bl.... The particular ones I
| have also seem to work somewhat on touchscreens which is
| useful for the commute home
| Groxx wrote:
| To people who may not live in colder climates: you can
| find one-size-fits-all stretchy gloves that look like
| this practically everywhere, but they aren't all
| _useless_ like the ones you find everywhere. Thinsulate
| and other actually-good insulating tech can be
| surprisingly effective.
| scotty79 wrote:
| When you keep the core toasty your hands keep warm enough
| too. Especially if you are male.
| gfio wrote:
| My wife knits and made me some fingerless gloves, I'm
| guessing you could find something similar on eBay or Etsy.
| Highly recommended
| pamelafox wrote:
| I use both fingerless gloves and arm warmers to keep my
| hands warm.
| scythe wrote:
| Electrically heated clothing is a terrible idea. Comfortable
| for three years, then one day it just kills you. There's a
| reason that every power cable says things like "do not
| crush", but who's going to rigorously avoid putting their
| body weight on their shirt?
| Spivak wrote:
| We somehow don't manage not to die with heating pads so I
| think it'll be fine.
| ornornor wrote:
| My heated gloves are battery powered. Something like 3.7V
| and 1300 mAh or something. Unlikely to kill anyone ever.
| com2kid wrote:
| This completely fails for me. I will end up with freezing cold
| hands and a warm body. Put me in a 65f room and after an hour
| of being idle my hands will start to go numb from the cold.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| Have you seen a doctor about this just to make sure you don't
| have circulation issues?
|
| Alternatively, keep some fingerless gloves around - or learn
| to knit/crochet/sew and make some (they aren't all that
| complicated for something basic). For around the house, you
| could honestly convert some socks if you aren't worried about
| how they might look. I'd get some of the no-fray glue they
| sell at craft stores if you go this route. These are great
| when you are idle.
| carlosjobim wrote:
| > Have you seen a doctor about this just to make sure you
| don't have circulation issues?
|
| What can the doctor do about it?
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| Not a doctor, but I'd think that would depend entirely on
| what was causing it.
| com2kid wrote:
| > Have you seen a doctor about this just to make sure you
| don't have circulation issues?
|
| Yes, doctor said I have poor circulation in my extremities.
| Except she said that using Latin, so that was super
| helpful. /s
|
| From what I've read, the body primarily measures core temp
| around the chest, so wearing lots of layers on the body can
| cause the extremities to get cold since the body goes
| "everything is warm enough, no need to even try and warm
| things up with extra blood flow!"
|
| So paradoxically, wearing less clothes can help.
| hgsgm wrote:
| wolf gloves / thumbhole shirts, and of you are _idle_ you can
| tuck hands under a blanket or chest pockets.
| pc86 wrote:
| Wearing gloves and holding your hands inside your pockets
| while reading so you can save $10/month on your electricity
| bill seems pretty miserable.
| gambiting wrote:
| The problem is that it isn't $10 a month. Not anymore
| with the current energy prices. At least here in UK the
| difference between 18C(65F) and 20C at home can be
| literally hundreds of pounds a month.
| 8note wrote:
| Gloves and pockets are pretty compfy
| eadmund wrote:
| Have you tried wristers? They're basically tubes for your
| upper hand, wrist and lower forearm, with a little slit for
| your thumb. By keeping the blood at the wrist warm they keep
| your hands _much_ warmer than they'd otherwise be, while
| letting you retain full freedom of motion for your fingers.
| They're even better than fingerless gloves in that regard.
| p1nkpineapple wrote:
| Wristers (we call them "pulse-warmers" here) are AMAZING.
| My Grandmother-in-law spends her days knitting hundreds of
| these, and now we have multiple plastic bags full of fluffy
| multicolured pulse-warmers that we don't know what to do
| with.
|
| If anyone her wants to pay the postage from NZ, I'll
| happily send them around the world for no cost :)
| nexus2045 wrote:
| Got a small heater (size of a small PC speaker) for 20 bucks
| on Amazon, most effective purchase I've made in recent
| memory, super effective for cold fingers and doesn't even
| need to be on all the time
| spoiler wrote:
| Which one did you get? I tried getting one at work a few
| years ago and all it did was feel like a dragon's breath on
| my face, and my hands got a bit of warmth
| balfirevic wrote:
| Funny, it's only after moving away from my parents and going to
| college that I learned that you can heat your home so that it's
| comfortable. No need to dread such things as entering the cold
| bed at night, leaving the warm bed in the morning or sitting on
| the cold toilet seat.
|
| I wish floor heating was more widespread where I live.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Electric blanket, hot water bottle, robe, soft toilet seat,
| etc... 1000x more efficient.
| balfirevic wrote:
| 1000x more miserable too.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Not at all, these things are downright luxurious.
| Wouldn't do without them, and you won't know till you
| try. It's not like you're required to keep the house a
| freezer in combo.
|
| Just silly not to focus the heat where the need is. Do
| you light up the whole house to illuminate your desk?
| ROTMetro wrote:
| In floor heating with a geothermal heat pump = winning :) The
| upfront cost is a killer but quality of life wise afterwards
| oh man. Zero cold spots and unlimited hot water as a bonus
| side effect. Especially amazing when you live in the
| mountains.
| lannisterstark wrote:
| I have a chihuahua. I'm willing to accept the slightly higher
| cost in winters for her being comfy.
| orange_joe wrote:
| My mom has 2 short hair chihuahuas (7-8lbs) and they wear
| sweaters 6 months a year. Just like the rest of us!
| b0sk wrote:
| The issue is it doesn't work for people who tend to sweat
| easily.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| I have a jacket that has zippers under the armpits. :-)
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| That isn't true at all.
|
| You simply need layers and good enough deodorant. A bit of
| experience helps as well - you learn how warm to keep your
| base layer after some time. If you sweat in non-standard
| places (like under breasts), spray deodorant might be your
| friend.
|
| I personally deal with this because of hormones - I'm a
| female in my mid-40s, so I get to have hot flashes and night
| sweats during part of my cycle right now.
| q845712 wrote:
| I'm one of the sweatiest people I've ever met. I've slowly
| gotten better at layering and how to use clothes for
| different situations, but I agree it's a big factor and
| there's some unwinnable combinations.
|
| For instance, I've finally learned to embrace "long-john"
| style long underwear under my pants, but it's only possible
| because I'm working from home. They are amazing layers for
| warmth, but unlike additional shirts, hoodies, jackets,
| scarves, hats, long underwear can't be casually removed. You
| have to take off your shoes and your pants! So if (when) I
| was going into an office, I always made the choice to have
| cold legs during the commute but comfortable legs all day.
| Now I can wear them in the morning, take them off if the day
| warms up, and put them back on whenever the temp. drops
| again.
|
| But overall I'll echo a few comments in here that some of the
| more expensive gear, even as base layers, really is better
| technology. And getting to know my body and my situational
| habits, it's been possible to figure out layering clothing
| that worked for me, but only because I was working in tech
| and felt like I had enough money to get it wrong a couple
| times... If I were still living on a student or even
| "average" budget, I would've been much shyer about trying
| some new $30 shirt just to see if it agreed with me.
| dirtyid wrote:
| What's your long johns situation? I haven't found anything
| that bridges the winter gap where I'm comfy outside and not
| boiling/sweating inside.
| jollyllama wrote:
| Have you tried genuine silk long johns? That's the gold
| standard for me.
| trashface wrote:
| I agree for most people this works, but people with circulatory
| disorders such as Reynauds may still find that their hands and
| feet and even nose are freezing. Only fix for that is warm
| ambient air.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| That's usually true...
|
| But for a few years I lived in a very well insulated (smallish)
| apartment in a moderate climate. When it would get cold, I
| would turn the heat on. My bill would go up by a few dollars.
|
| Then, I changed jobs and started working in a colder building.
| I spent more on warm clothes than I usually spent on heat! (And
| I had baseboard resistive heating, and I payed extra for wind
| power.)
| rednerrus wrote:
| A cashmere sweater is the best investment you'll every make.
| jeremy_wiebe wrote:
| Slippers have been a game changer for staying warm. We live in
| a concrete apartment building and the floors are always cold in
| the winter. Insulating my feet is by far the easiest way to
| stay warm without heating the entire house to a "short sleeves
| and shorts" comfortable temp.
| nicbou wrote:
| Yep. Took me over 20 years, but I got there eventually.
|
| A sweater and warm socks are game changers, as is a warm winter
| jacket and a good scarf. Add some tea and candles and the
| winter isn't half bad anymore. It's much easier to get through
| the cold months if you don't dread being outside.
| SergeAx wrote:
| I see here a number of comments about turning heating down as a
| way to live more "green" lifestyle. I see it as a corporate
| brainwashing and guilt shift getting into people's heads.
|
| I just moved and now renting a place with electric water heater
| with pump moving that heated water around via radiators. It is
| quite large apartment with shitty, to be honest, insulation.
| The difference between "I put several layers of clothes on" and
| "I am wearing a t-shirt" is about 600 kWh per month. The same
| amount of energy is needed to prodice 30 kg of aluminium or run
| a single rack in a datacenter for just 2 days.
|
| Never in your life your energy consumption can be compared with
| industrial usage. Likewise, never in you life your water
| consuption can reach a visible fraction of agricultural
| irrigation. Stop listening to coprorate PR.
| SamPatt wrote:
| I understand your sentiment but your examples still sound
| like a _lot_ of energy.
|
| If every home ran a server rack for two days a month, or
| produced 30kg of aluminum, that would obviously add up
| extremely quickly.
| SergeAx wrote:
| Yes, it's a lot of energy, and it shocked me first, because
| I never lived in a home that big before. It also costs the
| money most people consider worth saving. But it still
| fascinates me how relatively small this amount of energy
| compared to any type of industrial usage. Also, I need it
| only 2 months in a year.
| blahedo wrote:
| I've known this one for years and years but it always surprises
| a few of my students (who come from warmer climates) when I
| mention it:
|
| The scarf goes on the _inside_ of the coat.
|
| If you put the scarf on the outside, like you think you've seen
| in TV and movies, it's just decoration. Put it on the inside
| and it's an insulation layer and it blocks the cold air from
| blowing down your front. Absolutely game-changing. (Also, have
| a good coat, but that one seems more obvious to people.)
| scohesc wrote:
| I found out if I tie the scarf around my face with the knot
| at the back of my neck, so the scarf covers the front of my
| face (mouth/nose/part of ears) and the loose ends loop around
| and get tucked between my jacket and my chest - I've been
| infinitely warmer since!
|
| Hollywood doesn't know what winter is :P
| mikewarot wrote:
| Hollywood does it that way so you can see the actors face.
| chewonbananas wrote:
| I've been tying my scarf like that for quite some time!
| Haven't seen anyone else use it like that, though.
| phyzome wrote:
| That makes sense, sort of like a gasket. But for biking, I
| wear it on the outside so I can keep it over my mouth,
| allowing me to retain some warmth in my breath.
| orange_fritter wrote:
| I use a gaiter for this and it's crucial. It gets damp with
| breathing, haven't really figured out a good solution
| besides spinning the gaiter around every once in a while.
| crazygringo wrote:
| I switched from a gaiter to a scarf precisely because of
| the dampness.
|
| I can tie a scarf to be just slightly looser than the
| gaiter, and the extra space decreases the dampness
| massively, while still retaining almost all of the
| warmth.
| tasuki wrote:
| I never understood putting things over one's mouth to keep
| warm. Doesn't it become moist and have a cooling effect?
| wruza wrote:
| Wait, some people wear scarfs outside unironically?
| fHr wrote:
| First thing I bought from my first salary was some socks, a
| comfy thick hoodie and pants. Best investment of my life after
| going years in broke ass student dime secondhand ancient weared
| clothing, especially now where we try to save energy and office
| is not 5 degrees overheated anymore. Everyone complains about
| being cold and I'm just warm.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Plus your houseplants will thank you... when you die and meet
| them in the afterlife.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| An extreme version of this: my mother in law lives in southern
| china where they don't get indoor heating by default (and the
| buildings are poorly insulated and aren't designed to be
| insulated, so adding it yourself isn't very feasible), so we
| are all bundled up the entire time we spend there in the
| winter, and everyone else is to, including the clerks are the
| department store and so on. The coldest 5C of my life :).
|
| That's what happens when central planning makes the above
| observation.
| ozim wrote:
| I think one problem is managing moisture not to get mold at
| home.
|
| So most likely you still need to keep heating on but it might
| not need to be super high - just enough to have convection from
| heater moving air at home and having some ventilation letting
| in a bit of outside air in and warm one getting moisture out.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| Another thing that can really help with this is a hot water
| bottle. You can put it on your lap, or under your feet and it
| really helps you keep warm if you are sitting for long periods
| of time. Helps if you put a small blanket over your lap as
| well. Usually lasts for a couple of hours before you need to
| refresh the water in the bottle.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| Between your thighs...max blood flow and contact area.
| gvurrdon wrote:
| I just received as a gift a hand-made harness for attaching a
| hot water bottle to one's chest or back. It is rather
| effective.
|
| https://pothies.co.uk/hotwater-bottle-carrier-from-pothies/
| lexh wrote:
| This just came across my desk this morning, it discusses the
| benefits of hot water bottles as an alternative means of
| keeping warm.
|
| https://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2022/01/the-revenge-of-
| the-h...
|
| (HN discussion from 2022
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30023681)
| hgsgm wrote:
| For the HN crowd: point your computer exhaust fan at your
| fingers or feet.
| lovehashbrowns wrote:
| I was playing cyberpunk this winter with a 4090 at 4k RT on
| and all settings maxed. My desktop took the living room
| from around 50F to over 72F. My A/C turned on! It was
| genuinely insane
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Unfortunately the M1 runs a lot cooler than older models
| :(. Old Intel models would almost burn your fingers!
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| How to? Usually sent out the back.
| askiiart wrote:
| Especially if you've got a bulldozer!
| danjoredd wrote:
| That reminds me of a Calvin and Hobbes comic. Coincidentally,
| this was also how I was raised:
|
| https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1986/12/30/
| iamwpj wrote:
| I live in the midwest and cold is normal for a chunk of the
| year, but one thing always worse than cold: wind. After college
| at some point I splurged on a North Face jacket with the wind
| protection bit and it was eye popping how much more tolerable
| being outside became. I always go for a nicer coat/jacket now
| -- the value brands at the department stores don't always have
| the right technology. Good outdoor gear is spendy, but lasts a
| very long time and is very effective.
| scwoodal wrote:
| There is no such thing as bad weather, only bad gear ;)
| duckmysick wrote:
| Wet-bulb temperatures above 30 C/85 F are pretty bad no
| matter what you're (not) wearing.
| warrenm wrote:
| It's almost like the cultures that have "always" lived in
| cold areas (nordic people, siberians, inuit, etc) knew what
| to do ... layer with natural fibers - keeping the "treated"
| side of the clothing facing the outside world :)
| [deleted]
| theGnuMe wrote:
| I have a hard mountain down jacket from 25 years ago with
| wind protection that I wear when it is below freezing. Still
| works amazing.
| therealdrag0 wrote:
| For wind I think what matters is having a hard ish shell,
| knowing that can make price flexible. I have pretty old and
| cheap winter jacket that I ski in and it keeps me really
| warm.
| agotterer wrote:
| I live in New York and didn't own a proper winter jacket
| until I was in my 30s. I always wore a warm jacket that in
| hindsight was more appropriate for the fall. I bought a
| Quartz jacket and it made being outside in the winter so much
| more fun and tolerable.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| So much this. I got all my Marmot & North Face stuff years
| ago before they became trendy suburban clothing. The little
| things like reinforced knees or a bit of extra material in
| the back so you can bend over without wind exposure makes a
| huge difference when it's -20F. That stuff has been in
| constant use for 20 years and except for the gloves that
| finally gave up from being dunked in water and freezing on a
| daily basis, is still going strong.
| ddorian43 wrote:
| Diet. I think everyone should do keto diet or carnivore. There is
| no "everbody has his own diet". It is a little bit strong, but I
| believe it to be true. Everything else is either addictive and
| harmful or doesn't have nutrients.
| yboris wrote:
| "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." ... the best food is
| plant based and reduction of animal products is beneficial for
| one's health.
| ddorian43 wrote:
| You only took the "carnivore" part, which is just an easy way
| to do keto.
|
| My idea is that "keto diet" is best. You'll find that doing
| "vegan keto" is a bit hard because plants don't have
| nutrients that are bio-available. "vegan keto" is insanely
| better than "vegan".
| ariekachler wrote:
| Dismissing people as undesirable without any thought of why they
| became the way they are. It's very easy to quickly make up your
| mind about someone who you don't like without asking yourself
| "why did this person became such an a-hole or someone you just
| don't want to have any relation with". I have realized that most
| of these people have had lives that have made them whatever
| negative adjectives I would give them.
| MourningWood wrote:
| I try to think everyone is a product of their environment.
| andersthue wrote:
| Being arrogant for 47~ish years, did nothing good for me.
|
| Now I work hard on being friendly, curious and kind towards
| others.
| codazoda wrote:
| As my grandfather lay dying in a hospital bed he said, "I wish
| I had been a nicer person".
|
| I'm glad you figured this out with time to make adjustments and
| I hope that it brings you a smile in your final days.
| simonswords82 wrote:
| I did lol @ Final Days. He's 47!
| bgilroy26 wrote:
| It's a koan
| slv77 wrote:
| Tying shoelaces in a granny knot instead of a square knot. In a
| granny knot the shoe laces sit crooked and easily come undone.
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/grannyknot.htm
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| Honestly - when I bought a bidet seat, I truly felt like I had
| been lied to my whole life that TP was acceptable.
| leet_thow wrote:
| Taking a number two without the use of a footstool to get into a
| more natural squatting position. I look forward to the ritual
| every morning and usually achieve 'poophoria'.
| aaronax wrote:
| Wouldn't leaning forward accomplish the same thing?
| ThinkingGuy wrote:
| I started leaning forward a few years ago. I'll just say it
| seems to help.
| c120 wrote:
| If you need more convincing, you can buy the stool! This video
| ad explains it in detail.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbYWhdLO43Q
| toyg wrote:
| Hugely underrated tip. Standard toilets are just that, a
| guesstimated average of the height one might need to poop
| relatively comfortably. Because it was originally derived from
| chairs (the first toilets being actual chairs with a hole),
| with no respect for how human anatomy developed over millions
| of years, in most cases it's way too high for anyone under 6
| feet / 180cm. Someone should run studies on whether this
| influences the rates of colon cancer.
|
| The most naturally-ergonomic toilet is actually the seatless
| "turkish" hole. Unfortunately it's often not the easiest to use
| in a hygienic manner, and it requires a lot of space. I wish
| someone would invest in evolving that model into something
| better.
| muzani wrote:
| I grew up with the turkish holes. IMHO they're not ergonomic
| at all, and don't actually need much more space than a
| typical toilet. Eventually most of them get replaced by the
| typical Western toilets, because old people have problems
| squatting.
| toyg wrote:
| They might not feel more ergonomic to our increasingly-
| underused muscles, but they are to our colons.
|
| _> old people have problems squatting._
|
| They shouldn't be required to, but everyone else should
| have the option to preserve their bodies better.
| scns wrote:
| To make it explicit, the colon gets straightened that way,
| business becomes easier.
| mabbo wrote:
| My father said to me: "I like a shower better than a bath, but
| ugh, that first blast of cold water when you turn it on is always
| a bit shocking."
|
| Me: "Why don't you turn on the shower, wait for it to get warm,
| then get in?"
|
| Him, realizing he'd been using a shower wrong for over 6 decades:
| "... huh."
| SilasX wrote:
| That ... still seems like the wrong way. Every shower I've
| known has let you angle the head down. So start it that way,
| feel for the water to get warm, then turn it towards you.
|
| With the method you described, it takes longer, with more water
| usage, to get into position, plus you let some water spray out
| into the rest of the bathroom as you transition inside it.
| sockaddr wrote:
| I think that blast of cold water might have done good things
| for his endorphin levels. Just curious about this anecdote, was
| he generally a happy person?
| beznet wrote:
| for me, I take showers at night close to bed time. The last
| thing I want to experience is a cold shock to my system at
| that time of day. I can see it being useful in the morning
| though
| godshatter wrote:
| Huh. I just block the stream with my hand until it warms up.
| coreyhn wrote:
| Haha, gotta love the simple solutions
| raldi wrote:
| There's a clever product that you can screw inline with the
| showerhead that lets cold water through at full blast but when
| the water gets hot, something pops (presumably using metal-
| expansion properties the way old thermostats did) and the flow
| is reduced to a trickle, so you only use just enough water to
| keep it hot.
|
| Then when you get in, you pull a cord and it releases the full
| pressure of nice hot water.
| jedberg wrote:
| We just keep a 5 gallon bucket next to the shower and fill it
| up with the pre-warm water. Then we use it to water the
| garden (and sometimes to power flush a stuck toilet).
| number6 wrote:
| I like your dad's way better; also don't turn on the warm water
| yamtaddle wrote:
| But that would ruin the best waking part of 95% of my days.
| Radim wrote:
| Reminds me of an old joke:
|
| > _The best part of having cold showers every day? You 'll
| never get arthritis!_
|
| > _The worst part? You 'll have cold showers every day._
| badpun wrote:
| > The best part of having cold showers every day? You'll
| never get arthritis!
|
| Is that so? My joints in fingers and toes can hurt quite
| badly after being to too much cold water. Doesn't feel
| like it's helping them in any way - quite the opposite.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| Right; the cold blast comes at the end!
| anthonypasq wrote:
| my shower at my current apartment actually have the temp and
| volume nozzles separate so that i can taper the water
| pressure and it stays hot. Its delightful, i dont know why
| this isnt standard.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| i meant that i intentionally run it on cold for the last 30
| seconds or so of a shower.
| heldrida wrote:
| Haha! Thanks for sharing! I had a good laugh :D
| p1mrx wrote:
| If you have a sink near the shower, run it full blast on hot to
| flush the cold water from the pipe.
|
| This mainly saves time, but it also saves water if your shower
| mixer valve doesn't go to 100% hot. (It's generally good to
| keep the hot limiter below 100%, to avoid full-body scalding.)
| pards wrote:
| Wim Hof would disagree. I always start and end my showers with
| 1 minute of full cold (in Canada, so cold = 8degC)
| tasuki wrote:
| Why start the shower full cold? (I end showers cold, not sure
| if 1 minute, sometimes less sometimes more depending on mood)
| pards wrote:
| I start with full cold because it's more of a shock to the
| system. I find the cold water improves my mood and provides
| a daily dose of "suck it up, buttercup". I've __almost__
| started crave that cold shock in the mornings now, and the
| cold water at the end of the hot shower feels like ..
| relief.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| Related: you can buy "hot water recirculation systems" to keep
| the water hot in your shower. When the water in your hot water
| pipes gets cold, it dumps it into your cold water pipes.
| Therefore the water isn't wasted.
|
| This can save a lot of water if you're the type to let your
| shower run until it is warm. So some jurisdictions encourage
| their installation.
| ajb wrote:
| I think those mostly work when the shower is running though.
| When it's stopped the water in the cold pipe is eventually
| going to get cold. Still a good idea - I've been planning to
| get one when I next redo my bathroom.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| These work when the hot water is cold, about twice a day
| for me, less if the shower is used regularly. The valve
| opens and water flows from your hot water pipe into your
| cold water pipe.
|
| So you should turn it off when you go on vacation.
| tzs wrote:
| I don't know if they are still around, but I've seen a shower
| head that includes a clever mechanism to reduce water waste
| if you let the shower run until warm.
|
| When you turn on the shower, the head operates normally while
| the water is cold. When the water becomes warm a valve in the
| head closes to stop the flow. There is a button on the head
| you press to open the valve, which then stays open until you
| turn off the water.
|
| The idea is that many people turn on the shower to warm up
| but don't just wait around in the bathroom to jump in as soon
| as the water is warm. They go do other things like start
| their coffee machine or wake up the kids or check the news
| and weather. Between the time the shower warms up and they
| get around to coming to see if it is warm they might waster
| several minutes worth of warm water.
|
| With this clever shower head they don't waste that water.
| Also, if they can hear the shower running from wherever they
| are doing other stuff when they hear it stop they know the
| warm water is ready.
| tesseractspace wrote:
| My friend in Cupertino had these on the shower head to stop
| water as soon as it's hot: ShowerStart TSV 3 Hot Water... h
| ttps://www.amazon.com/dp/B07WZQTWLG?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_shar
| .... Bought one and it's pretty great to clear out long
| cold pipes
| bityard wrote:
| Our local power company sells these and other power/water
| saving devices at a roughly 50% discount over
| retail/amazon:
| https://www.dtemarketplace.com/collections/water
| mindslight wrote:
| I get in, turn the water on max hot, and stick my hand in
| the stream of water coming out of the tub spigot. As it
| gets hotter, I adjust the temperature setting and converge
| on the right place. Then, I hit the diverter so water comes
| out of the shower head, while I stand mostly out of the
| spray (avoiding residual cold water and it takes a few
| seconds to warm up the pipes themselves). Then I stand
| fully under the spray and do minor adjustments, which
| continue throughout the shower.
|
| This seems natural to me, but I've never met anyone else
| who does it this way.
| bckr wrote:
| I think it really depends on your water system at home.
| In this apartment, the water heats up fast and gets
| really, really hot. So it takes about 5 seconds to reach
| the desired setting. There's also a pretty good range
| where it feels good to get in. So it's just not worth
| putting a lot of thought into it.
|
| At other apartments, I've had more involved systems.
|
| This thread is making me think of that blog title:
| Reality has a surprising amount of detail.
| mindslight wrote:
| I didn't spend any time designing that set of steps or
| anything. Rather at each point I'm just doing the
| immediate thing that will get me showering the quickest.
|
| It's probably most useful when the hot water comes up
| quick, less useful when you have to wait a while for
| that. And it fails horribly when the hot water isn't
| working.
|
| I've never felt the need to adjust though, except for
| shower-only stalls and the like.
| kgc wrote:
| Me too
| worthless-trash wrote:
| Same, but no diverter, they are not common in Australia.
| Anerudhan wrote:
| Why do not people use a bucket and a mug. By collecting water
| from the shower from freezing cold to scalding hot you
| average out the temperature for a nice warm shower and no
| wastage.
| bmelton wrote:
| Not quite as effective, but even easier is that you can get a
| back-flow preventer valve (approximately $10 worth of metal)
| that allows the hot water to push into your cold water (but
| not the reverse)
|
| As I understand it (and I am NOT a plumber) -- when you turn
| on the hot water, it pushes hot water up the line. Turn off
| the water, and that water will cool. But, if you add a one-
| way valve that allows flow from hot to cold, it will allow
| the higher pressure hot water line to flow into the cold
| water line so that it keeps hot water to the tap so that you
| don't have to wait (in my case) 5 minutes to flush out the
| cold water that has accumulated before getting to the hot
| water.
|
| A plumber friend suggested this to me when I complained about
| my master bathroom (the furthest in the house away from the
| heater) taking SO LONG to warm up. Then he came out and
| installed it in about 15 minutes (which would probably amount
| to a one hour minimum charge for a plumber not doing it for
| free) plus a $10 part he had us buy on Amazon.
|
| TLDR, now instead of taking 5 minutes to heat up from ice
| cold to warm to eventually hot, the hot water is warm from
| the second I open it, and hot within about 15-20 seconds.
| ericpauley wrote:
| Sounds like false economy to me. You're saving a minute
| amount of water but using far more energy to keep less-
| insulated water warm.
| Sebb767 wrote:
| Probably depends on your heater setup. My parents have a
| flow-activated central heating system in the basement and
| waiting for warm water can take over a minute. In my
| current apartment, I have an electric heater basically next
| to the shower and the water is warm within a few seconds at
| most.
| scotty79 wrote:
| I wonder why combination of central water heating plus
| electric heaters at the faucets is not more common.
| Probably the cost.
| pc86 wrote:
| "Far more" is relative, to say the least. We're talking
| about the amount of water that fills a shower pipe - very
| little - and unless you're only showering once a week it's
| not that big of a change.
| pavon wrote:
| In our house, the master bath is on the complete opposite
| side of the house from the water heater, and we have to
| run about two gallons of water before it gets hot, and if
| we wait more than 10 or 15 minutes between showers, the
| water in the pipes gets cold again, and we have to run
| another two gallons. In other words it isn't just the
| water in the shower pipe, it is the water in the full
| pipe between the heater and the shower.
|
| I've just started looking into either getting a tank-less
| water heater in the master bathroom or a recirculating
| system to save water. I like that the recirculating
| system would help with the entire house, not just that
| one bathroom, but it is looking to be quite expensive and
| wasteful of energy, unless we can do something like have
| switches in the bathrooms and kitchen to manually turn on
| the recirculator for a few minutes before use instead of
| running the water for a few minutes.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Look at instant hot water heaters to colocate near the
| fixtures; they don't have to be powerful enough to
| provide hot water for the entire fixture use, just the
| time between when fixture use starts and hot water
| arrives from the primary heat appliance.
|
| Fossil gas tankless units are nice because they can be
| installed on the exterior of a home and are maintenance
| free, but emit CO2 and can be expensive depending on your
| gas costs (they're better for seasonal dwellings imho).
| Ideal combination is resistive instant heaters at points
| of use with a heat pump water heater for the whole
| dwelling.
| justnotworthit wrote:
| They don't have to be instant either: I've seen 120V
| plugin models that have a small tank. No idea what's
| better, but you don't need a 240V hookup in the bathroom
| to have a "while the pipes heat up" heat source.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| In my house it's a lot. Due to the shower being in a
| different spot than when the house was originally built
| so the routing is about as inefficient as possible,
| there's well over 100 feet of pipe between our hot water
| tank and our shower.
| graton wrote:
| How much time does it take? In the US almost all shower-
| heads and faucets will only use a maximum of 2.5 gallons
| per minute. For me the water will get hot in about 30
| seconds. So I am using approximately 1.25 gallons of
| water. For me that is acceptable.
| halfnormalform wrote:
| You probably wouldn't need it in a single-family
| dwelling, but there's a recirculation system in my 100+
| unit building and it works great. Once it was turned off
| by accident and it took almost a minute to get hot water.
| Multiply that by all the neighbors and it seems like a
| good bargain.
| elil17 wrote:
| Like all thing in the water-energy nexus, the right answer
| depends on whether you live in a water-stressed
| environment. In California this may be a great idea, but it
| is probably not useful in New York.
| gpt5 wrote:
| There is no water shortage, there is an energy shortage.
| You can easily desalinate as much water as you want, it
| costs about $0.002 per gallon, while heating a gallon of
| water is 10x that.
| hawk_ wrote:
| That makes me wonder if there's a system that can recycle the
| heat lost in drain (hot water from the shower that just got
| drained).
| rjmunro wrote:
| I looked at this kind of thing a while ago:
| https://www.showersave.com/
|
| It seems like a no brainer, but the prices are so high
| (like PS700 / $900) that it would take many many years to
| pay back the cost, so it wasn't worth it.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/drain-water-heat-
| recovery
| BeefySwain wrote:
| https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/drain-water-heat-
| recovery
| Agentlien wrote:
| What's "a lot of water" in this context? My shower typically
| takes just a few seconds to get to temperature. Even a quick
| shower is typically a few minutes, so that tiny amount seems
| insignificant.
| saulpw wrote:
| The army method: stand there and take it like a man.
|
| The Superman method: put your hand up to block the blast.
|
| The Spiderman method: jump to the opposite side of the shower
| to avoid the blast.
|
| The clever method: turn on the shower and wait outside.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Using a vegetable peeler. You can cut on both strokes, push and
| pull, and it goes (more than) twice as fast.
| solarmist wrote:
| Oh, damn. Duh!
|
| I never even thought about it, but that's why there are two
| sharp blades.
| top_post wrote:
| I learned this one about a year ago and every time I try and do
| the push stroke I pretty successfully slip and cut myself. So I
| get you can do both but I'll be damned if the pull stroke isn't
| the only one I'm still doing.
| iancmceachern wrote:
| I still innately spell maybe mabye. I have to stop myself and
| correct my spelling manually wver single time I write the word.
| wallflower wrote:
| How to text if you would like to date someone.
|
| Not: "What's up"
|
| Not: "<open-ended question>"
|
| Not: "<this is what I did over the weekend>. How was yours?"
|
| Yes: <Logistics of meeting up>
| nerddadnear40 wrote:
| Get agreement of Time, Agenda, Outcome -- up front and in that
| order. Helps with all meetings not just dates.
| layer8 wrote:
| You could call it the TAO of meetings.
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| What do you mean by Agenda and Outcome?
| solarmist wrote:
| In my experience.
|
| Agenda - What are we going to do?
|
| Outcome - How do we know if the agenda was successful? / Or
| when to end the meeting (more for exploratory stuff, dates
| included).
| asimovfan wrote:
| Trying to get happiness from external conditions instead of
| making it at home in my body through meditation and
| understanding.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| Ask my wife what she prefers and tell her what I prefer.
|
| Years of marriage before we figured out I hate cleaning small
| things (silverware and glasses) and she hates cleaning big things
| (pots and pans). We permanently changed how we clean up after
| meals.
|
| Not exactly in line with your premise, but changed my entire
| outlook about expressing what I want or prefer about almost
| anything.
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| I've been playing guitar on and off for 30 years. I'm _holding
| the pick completely wrong_ and it probably negatively impacts my
| playing - but I 've struggled to correct it (I hold it with
| thumb, index and middle finger; if I try to hold it with just two
| fingers, it inevitably slides out after a few strums; I don't
| know how people do it).
|
| I've also been trying to snap my fingers wrong for 20 years until
| somebody finally explained to me that it wasn't my fingers
| rubbing / clicking / pouncing against each other that made the
| sound, it was the finger snapping/clapping on the meaty part of
| your wrist. Doh!
| 72deluxe wrote:
| What thickness pick do you use? I found thin picks very
| difficult to hold and moved to a .96mm Dunlop Delrin (the pink
| ones) standard and I found them easier to hold. There is more
| resistance from the strings but at least you can alternate
| pick.
|
| Here's me playing: https://youtu.be/gVIt8CVq7KQ?t=181
|
| But now you've made me question how I actually hold the pick -
| is it the first or second finger? I think it's first and thumb
| because my middle finger is stronger and calloused so more
| useful for tapping notes whilst the first finger grasps the
| pick during the tapping phase.
| auspex wrote:
| You're in good company James Hetfield plays this way too!
| SnooSux wrote:
| I got a guitar pick with a bit of texture on the part you grip
| with. I have really oily hands so glossy picks just slip
| through my fingers.
|
| I've also tried angling the pick so I have more surface area to
| grip with.
| spit2wind wrote:
| Many fine players use the three finger approach. Steve Morse
| comes to mind.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
|
| EDIT: link to Dixie Dregs in case you have no clue who Steve
| Morse is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrAa6K_28NU
| scns wrote:
| Hillybillymetal, Hell yeah!
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD9j0VfX7QU
| 72deluxe wrote:
| Steve Morse's Cruise Missile track is also a great track
| NikolaNovak wrote:
| Thanks, note that your first link came up empty (it's missing
| the video tag in the URL)
| Zanfa wrote:
| > I've been playing guitar on and off for 30 years. I'm holding
| the pick completely wrong and it hugely negatively impacts my
| playing - but I've struggled to correct it (I hold it with
| thumb, index and middle finger; if I try to hold it with just
| two fingers, it inevitably slides out after a few strums; I
| don't know how people do it).
|
| Try orienting the pick slightly so that when you strum the
| strings, it plucks the string with the leading edge, rather
| than with the flat side of the pick, so you don't need to press
| as hard.
|
| > I've also been trying to snap my fingers wrong for 20 years
| until somebody finally explained to me that it wasn't my
| fingers rubbing / clicking / pouncing against each other that
| made the sound, it was the finger snapping/clapping on the
| meaty part of your wrist. Doh!
|
| I've found snapping to be louder and fuller sounding if I don't
| use my thumb to "tension" the middle finger at all, but instead
| just smack the the middle finger against the "meaty part". Plus
| you can get a lot more snaps done in much less time if snaps-
| per-minute is an important metric.
| bradwood wrote:
| Being a smart-ass and saying to my kids: "I don't believe it, I
| _know_ it " without first stopping to realise that knowledge of
| something additionally requires that one believes it to be true.
| alberth wrote:
| Peeling a banana.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i733KI8B6-Q
| giantg2 wrote:
| "Something you've done your whole life that you realized is
| wrong?"
|
| Worked hard believing it would be rewarded.
| praveen9920 wrote:
| I would have missed this because of lack of enough upvotes
| but.. here's my perspective.
|
| You should work hard but on yourselves not for others. I did
| working hard for others for a decade and ended up in the same
| place after. I started working for/on myself, I am happier now
| if not richer.
| dennis_jeeves1 wrote:
| Thanks, that does add some nuance to the parent comment.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| >Worked hard believing it would be rewarded.
|
| Even if you're not seeing the rewards of your hard work now,
| they will come one day.
|
| Let's say you've spent the last 10 years working your arse off
| for a shitty boss who doesn't appreciate you. At least you're
| far more competent than if you'd been lazy for 10 years under
| the same shitty boss.
|
| Go find a better situation and you'll be grateful for the
| skills you've picked up, even if it hurt to acquire them.
| graeme wrote:
| Be careful with this one. Hard work, applied correctly, is
| rewarded. Hard work applied incorrectly is not.
|
| Examples of incorrect application:
|
| * working hard at something not valuable
|
| * working hard at something valuable then giving it away well
| below market rate
|
| *working hard at something valuable then poorly presenting it,
| e.g. bad marketing
|
| The second happens when you never ask for a raise/promotion,
| switch to a market rate job, or start a business that captures
| the value of the skill.
| solarmist wrote:
| Yes. Something I learned from contractors on how to fix a big
| part of this is good communication (this is not self-
| promotion). People pay much less attention to others than we
| expect, so most don't know what we're doing or what we did.
|
| 1) Say what you're going to do.
|
| 2) Do it.
|
| 2a) Bonus: If something changes, immediately say what has
| changed and reconfirm the agreement.
|
| 3) Say what you did.
|
| Those three steps go a long way toward being recognized for
| your contributions.
| skrebbel wrote:
| Turns out there are two ways to tie your shoelaces (the direction
| of the top knot wrt the bottom) and the one I didn't do never
| went untied.
|
| (Also turns out you can buy perfectly good shoes without laces so
| extra win)
| jameal wrote:
| Expecting other people to reach out to me without making any real
| effort myself.
|
| At some point I heard this thought experiment: If you could only
| have one, which is more important: To love or to be loved?
|
| Now I understand that if I want to receive love and connection
| that I have to be able to give it. This shift has strengthened so
| many of my relationships and helped me build new ones as well.
| [deleted]
| grenbys wrote:
| I've been rinsing my mouth after brushing my teeth my whole life.
| Turns out you should not. Logically, why even buy that expensive
| toothpaste only to negate all its positive impact by rinsing it
| away?
| notacoward wrote:
| Multiple people beat me to the shoelace one, so here's one I
| don't see yet: running. At 48, I had hated running practically
| since I had first been able to do it, but I was in a situation
| where I decided to give it another try. I quickly figured out
| _why_ I had hated it. I had been doing it wrong all my life. A
| little reading taught me about pacing and body lean and foot
| landings, and then ... well, it still kinda sucked TBH. But it
| sucked _a lot less_ , in the way that anything hard will suck,
| and I've been able to stick with it year-round for almost nine
| years since. Still amazes me that I spent more than four decades
| doing something so basic so wrong. So much for being a smart guy,
| I guess.
| DarkTree wrote:
| Along with this, the thing that helped me the most was learning
| to run much slower. I would always run at an uncomfortable pace
| that would jack my heart rate up and have me huffing and
| puffing. Then I learned about "Zone 2" training which
| essentially boils down to running at a pace where you could
| comfortably have a conversation and more easily run for
| extended periods. This now only made it so I could run more
| miles per week, but it turned running from an exhausted effort
| to a more meditative, enjoyable one.
|
| Things I think have helped me the most: 1. Correctly fitting
| shoes (I always wore shoes that were too narrow and short for
| my feet) 2. Wearing a heart rate monitor so that I could run at
| a pace that allows me to stay within the heart rate range that
| improves aerobic fitness while being easy enough to sustain
| (heart rate zone 2) 3. Increasing my cadence to the 170-180
| steps per minute range, which has allowed me to improve my
| form/efficiency and avoid shin splints.
| donohoe wrote:
| Do you recall the reading material? You just overcome my
| biggest barrier to healthy living.
| notacoward wrote:
| I don't recall specifically, but it's pretty easy to find
| articles e.g. on Runners World. Practically everyone seems to
| recommend _Born to Run_ but personally I 've never read it.
| For me it was getting my body lean and foot landing more
| forward, pushing more than pulling, and sacrificing a bit of
| stride length for higher cadence. And not being afraid to
| take breaks, especially when I was first building up to 5K.
| Any halfway decent running store should be able to help you
| understand about foot landings and get you the right shoes
| for your style. In fact, one of the things that has really
| helped me stick with it is being able to geek out about
| training and gear and stats. Plenty of room for that, and
| without it I might have had more trouble especially in the
| winter months. Good luck!
| koliber wrote:
| I recently realized why snowboard jackets have double zippers. I
| always struggled to bend down to clip in my boots into my
| snowboard bindings while standing up. I now unzip a third of the
| way there and it's a lot easier to bend down.
| MarcoSanto wrote:
| Worry about what other people think
| pengo wrote:
| Eating Marmite instead of Vegemite. Only in my fifties did I
| discover that Marmite tastes different because it contains sugar.
| aliqot wrote:
| Not liking how Ask HN is turning into AskReddit
| muzani wrote:
| Reminder that you can flag topics that violate the guidelines:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| erjjones wrote:
| Making promises.
|
| When my child would ask to do something or desire something I
| might have said, "Not today but I promise in the future ...".
| Often I would never follow up on those.
|
| Now, I am more inclined to say, "I will do my best to make that
| happen" or something along those lines but no promises.
| charlie0 wrote:
| Buying fewer more expensive items of clothing > buying more items
| at a much cheaper price point.
|
| I've noticed this the most with outdoorsy equipment, like my pair
| of wool socks (Darn Tough). They are 3x more expensive that
| cotton, but they keep my feet warm without overheating them, are
| thicker so I can comfortably walk around the house with no other
| footwear, they don't hardly get smelly, they also dry really
| fast. That last one comes in handy when you need to cross
| streams.
| jjice wrote:
| A good thing, on top of working better, can beat out cheap
| things for price per use pretty easily. Darn Tough is a great
| example. Best socks I've ever had to wear, but also I have
| pairs from six years ago that are still kick (plus they have a
| life time warranty).
|
| A cheap jacket for $50 dollars or a (well researched) jacket
| for $150 is an obvious win. Warmer, more durable, more
| comfortable, and looks better. I bet it can last 3 times longer
| than the cheaper jacket in a lot of cases, plus it could
| probably resell for much more. We don't often talk about equity
| in smaller purchases (probably because it's not as
| consequential), but buying good items means they'll probably
| hold value better for resale (same goes with buying them used).
| sgt101 wrote:
| I'll chip in with a vote for proper boots, I was going to say
| $500 Trickers but now I see that they are more like $800 new...
| but $300 on Ebay.
|
| And it's worth it - I've had two pairs (from ebay) that have
| lasted me for 10 years between them. Resoled many times, but
| still absolutely excellent.
|
| 10 years!
| crazygringo wrote:
| Funny, I've come to the opposite conclusion for most clothing.
|
| My weight fluctuates, my clothing needs change, my style
| changes, I discover a new type of clothing item that obsoletes
| an old one. Or stuff shrinks, rips, gets stained, gets lost.
|
| Expensive "long lasting" clothing isn't usually worth the
| investment in my experience for all of these reasons.
|
| Outdoorsy equipment may be an exception, but I don't feel like
| it's the case for regular clothing or merchandise in general.
|
| (Plus a lot of expensive stuff isn't actually any better
| quality than the cheap stuff, and it takes a lot of research to
| figure out when the expensive stuff actually is worth it and
| when it's not.)
| pancrufty wrote:
| Yes and no. Where I live I have a choice from dirt-cheap to
| "signature" garments. I like buying in the middle because I
| hate low-quality cloth and because I don't want to be wearing
| the same shirt 10 years in a row. Give me a good price for
| something that lasts 2-3 years and I'm set.
| tremon wrote:
| This only applies when you can accurately judge the quality of
| the clothes. I've stopped buying mid-market clothing a few
| years ago because they didn't last longer than the cheap stuff.
| paulbjensen wrote:
| Peeling bananas.
|
| I used to open them from the hard stem bit which was not always
| successful, but it turns out that if you pinch them at the other
| end, they open up much easier:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8svUCSuMS4
| benhurmarcel wrote:
| But then you need to remove the nasty dark bit.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| When in Poland, I learned of one urban legend there which was
| that your head to remove the end of the banana because there
| are some small livings (?) there (I think they called them
| "lamblia").
|
| Some folks (usually older) strongly believe that.
| solarmist wrote:
| Devil's anus
| gwbas1c wrote:
| It's called the "bananas"
|
| https://theoatmeal.com/comics/bananus
| solarmist wrote:
| I prefer devil's anus. :)
| orange_fritter wrote:
| You can also grab it with both hands and just break the whole
| banana in half with a quick pop. The line will be clean. Hand
| one half to your date as if nothing happened.
| forinti wrote:
| I was in my late 30s when I found out I didn't have to peel
| kiwis (I love kiwis). It doesn't really affect the taste to
| just eat them unpeeled.
| Topgamer7 wrote:
| Grab with two hands, break apart in the middle.
| racl101 wrote:
| That barring any real medical issue ... intermittent fasting is
| hard. We just think it is.
|
| Every time I tried it, I'd sabotage my efforts not knowing by
| chewing gum, eating tic tacs, using flavored tea, etc this would
| just trigger my insulin response and I'd get hungry throughout
| the day.
|
| All I had to do, is just simplify my intake to any of these:
| water, black coffee, black tea or any tea with a bitter profile.
|
| And that's it. Fasting would get easier after that, especially
| after first few days.
|
| And you could do 4h, 6h, 8h, 12h, 20h easy peasy. No problem.
|
| And if you should experience the desire to eat during those
| periods, most of the time it was just psychological. Your body
| isn't dying. You are more resilient than that.
| solarmist wrote:
| If I understand you correctly.
|
| To do fasting drink more non-calorie liquids. Which is
| absolutely correct. I drink like 2x as much liquid when I'm
| fasting.
| keepquestioning wrote:
| [dead]
| egberts1 wrote:
| Working on social interactions and refining nuances would have
| gone a long way for my career but my sheer technical aptitude has
| managed to carry me pretty far as I am happy to go.
| Havoc wrote:
| Acquired a utility knife with those cheap replaceable blades
| instead of abusing the kitchen scissors for everything
| soheil wrote:
| Reading hackernews to find out how to start a startup
| DavidPiper wrote:
| Drinking a glass of orange juice every morning. That stuff is
| full of sugar.
|
| Actually managing sugar intake in general. I'm 30 and just
| starting to do something about it.
| twbarber wrote:
| Same here!
| jcpst wrote:
| I used to always stand up to wipe. At one point in my adult life,
| there was a conversation and I realized everyone else does not do
| this. Then I tried wiping while sitting down. So much easier.
| mmcgaha wrote:
| Yeah but if you stand your hand will never touch the water in
| one of the tiny grandma's house sized toilets.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| It must be cultural. We never stand up to wipe in France.
| kodt wrote:
| I think this starts because as a kid maybe it is easier to
| stand up? And no-one ever told you to stop because once you are
| old enough to handle your business on your own no-one is there
| to see and offer advice.
| goodgoblin wrote:
| A couple of years ago I realized that the big metal rod inside
| the box that holds the knives is for sharpening.
| justin_oaks wrote:
| It's a honing rod or honing steel. Honing isn't exactly the
| same thing as sharpening, but yes it will help the knife cut
| better.
|
| I've heard it explained that honing is for improving the
| cutting edge you have, and sharpening is cutting a new edge.
| BanazirGalbasi wrote:
| As already mentioned, it's for honing. The difference is that
| sharpening involves removing metal to create a new edge, while
| honing simply bends the edge back to being straight. Although
| we think of steel as being a hard material, the edge of a knife
| is thin enough that it gets bent to one side or the other just
| through normal use. Using a honing rod to push the steel back
| to where it belongs means the knife _feels_ sharper because you
| 're now cutting with the actual edge.
| orange_fritter wrote:
| It's not, it's for honing
| [deleted]
| goodgoblin wrote:
| and til the difference between (and that there was a
| difference between) honing and sharpening.
| Dave3of5 wrote:
| Care about what the company I'm working with is making. If I'm
| not heavily in equity and it's just a job then I shouldn't be
| giving a dam about they are making. I should only be interesting
| in what they are paying me and the benefits I get from working at
| the company.
|
| I used to get real upset when the codebase I working on was shit
| and even left companies due to this. In reality what was more
| important was those companies where paying a shit wage that was
| why their codebase stank.
| layer8 wrote:
| Pretty sad to spend half your waking time making something you
| don't care about.
| SeanAnderson wrote:
| Surely you should also care what impact said company is having
| on society? :)
| zander312 wrote:
| For the past 15 years or so, every night before bedtime I would
| proclaim "Time to hit the shack!" or "I'm going to hit the
| shack".
|
| In reality it is a "sack" that you hit, not a "shack".
| ebjaas_2022 wrote:
| I had a colleague some years ago, who consistently said 'add
| hook' instead of 'ad hoc'. I never had the heart to correct
| him.
| daveslash wrote:
| For all intensive purposes, they're the same. (I'd been saying
| "intensive" instead of "intents and" until my mid 20s)
|
| *edit: Fixed a spelling mistake. It's still early here... :-p
| mhandley wrote:
| Um, https://www.grammarly.com/blog/for-all-intents-and-
| purposes/
| circlefavshape wrote:
| It's actually "intents and"
| daveslash wrote:
| _oof!!_ yes, embarrassing on my part for sure... it 's
| still super early on a Monday here. I do know that it's
| "intents", that was just my fingers typing out the wrong
| word... corrected my comment.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| I thought you did it on purpose as a nod to the OP making
| the same kind of mistake. Should run with that story
| daveslash wrote:
| My original comment was "I'd been saying "intensive"
| instead of " _intense_ and " until my mid 20s"
|
| I even had the "correct" version wrong! The first was a
| nod to op, the second was a goof on my part. :-p
| BryanRamirez wrote:
| https://www.reddit.com/r/BoneAppleTea/
| toyg wrote:
| Typing. I've always been a self-taught hunt-picker, but for some
| reason, as a teenager I picked up a terrible technique that
| involves using thumbs for keys to the side of the spacebar.
|
| Later in life I trained myself into touch-typing (and then to use
| Colemak), but for some reason I can't seem to shake off this
| annoying thumb bit.
| truculent wrote:
| How did you train yourself into it?
| toyg wrote:
| I used GTypist but it was a long time ago.
|
| These days there are excellent tools online: ratatype,
| typeracer, keybr, keyzen-colemak, typelit.io, typing cat,
| speedcoder, etc etc.
|
| The main approach is:
|
| 1. don't look at the keyboard. Print out a layout, better if
| color-coded to indicate which finger should be used, and put
| it near the monitor. Whatever happens, don't look at the
| keyboard, ever.
|
| 2. index fingers on the two central keys with the little
| rubber bit (F and J in qwerty).
|
| 3. accept that it will take weeks to be as productive as you
| were before, but then it will (should) be much easier to go
| faster.
| truculent wrote:
| Thank you, that is really helpful.
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| Is using your pinky really any better?
|
| The only way to truly get an economically "correct" typing
| posture is to use a keyboard that actually has keys under your
| resting hands' fingers. That means using a keyboard that was
| designed to match the shape of _hands_ , not the shape of a
| 19th century typewriter.
|
| There is no ergonomical way to use a traditional keyboard. All
| you can do is pick your favorite compromise. Using a better
| layout (like Colemak) helps a lot, but it can't fix the whole
| problem.
| toyg wrote:
| I agree wholeheartedly. I use a split keyboard and it helps a
| lot. Unfortunately, keyboards who really go all the way are
| still prohibitely expensive for most of us.
| rgoulter wrote:
| I think a reasonable compromise is "keyboards with 2-3 keys
| for each thumb".
|
| Rather, with 2-3 keys for each thumb, and either using home
| row modifiers (with tap-hold, or with chording): it allows
| for really minimizing the need to use pinkies, and
| eliminates needing to reach for the corners where
| Ctrl/Gui/Alt are typically placed.
| hbn wrote:
| I think using your thumb for Cmd on Mac or Alt on other
| keyboards (i.e. the closest modifier key to the spacebar) makes
| sense and feels like less of a position shift from homerow
| compared to using a pinky.
|
| And in fact I'd find it very hard to hit something like Cmd+Q
| with just my left hand if I use the pinky for Cmd.
| throw7 wrote:
| Supposedly you're not to rinse after brushing so the flouride can
| "apply" to your teeth. I think that's gross so oh well.
| KVFinn wrote:
| You aren't supposed to rinse your mouth with water after brushing
| your teeth. You're supposed to spit excess, but leave the
| toothpaste on to absorb.
| throw1234651234 wrote:
| Or rinse and use mouthwash with fluoride and leave that. Brush
| from top to bottom, not side to side. "Scrape" your tooth when
| flossing. Seems like way too many never learn these basics.
| raspyberr wrote:
| Don't use mouthwash straight after brushing. Seems like way
| too many never learn these basics.
|
| https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/healthy-teeth-and-gums/how-
| to-k...
| moffkalast wrote:
| > It doesn't matter whether you use an electric or manual
| toothbrush. They're both equally good
|
| That's just so wrong already. Regular toothbrushes are
| absolute trash compared to sonics, every dentist will tell
| you that.
|
| > don't use mouthwash (even a fluoride one) straight after
| brushing your teeth or it'll wash away the concentrated
| fluoride in the toothpaste left on your teeth
|
| So in a nutshell, don't use it because it'll wash away the
| flouride... that you've already rinsed out. Yeah not much
| of a minus there.
| wingworks wrote:
| I've heard that studies found that electric vs manual can
| both do a sufficient clean. But the issue is, most people
| don't know the proper technique to use a manual brush
| effectively. So even if you do a half ass job with an
| electric brush, it's still better then what most would do
| with a manual.
| mhb wrote:
| > Brush from top to bottom, not side to side.
|
| Gonna need a cite on that. Pretty sure the recommendation is
| to hold the brush at 45 degrees and use circular movements.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| Interesting. My dentist always told me the direction must
| be from the root to the top otherwise you would just push
| the remains of food into the gums - and it seems like a
| logical advice to follow.
| wingworks wrote:
| This dental hygienist also says to use a circular motion
| at and angle. https://youtu.be/FFq-2aA6m8Y?t=50
|
| Maybe bring this up in your next session.
| lm28469 wrote:
| > "Scrape" your tooth when flossing. Seems like way too many
| never learn these basics.
|
| Nothing proves flossing is beneficial actually
| BizarreByte wrote:
| A nothing proves it isn't, so you might as well spend the
| extra minute or two and do it.
| lm28469 wrote:
| Well: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-
| news/dental-fl...
|
| Also, nothing doesn't prove eating twelve apples per day
| cures cancer so why not try it ?
| BizarreByte wrote:
| Because I would probably feel sick if I ate that many
| apples per day. Flossing is low effort, why not do it?
| Majestic121 wrote:
| That's quite a weird answer.
|
| All else being equal, it's obviously better not to spend
| an extra minute or two doing something useless.
|
| If you think it is not actually equal, and that scraping
| is indeed better, well say so and qualify your statement.
| You can even say that it's recommended by dentists, it's
| an authority argument but it surely is better than
| nothing.
| BizarreByte wrote:
| I do think it's worth the time. My teeth _feel_
| significantly cleaner after doing so and it removes stuff
| my brush can't reach no matter how much I try.
|
| I'm not sure why I have have to defend flossing of all
| things. I'm not trained in that field, neither are you,
| we should listen to the people who are and guess what?
| They almost all recommend flossing.
|
| That argument was accepted with COVID vaccines, so why
| not now?
| CorrectHorseBat wrote:
| You said
|
| >A nothing proves it isn't, so you might as well
|
| That's completely different from
|
| >I'm not trained in that field, neither are you, we
| should listen to the people who are and guess what? They
| almost all recommend flossing.
| [deleted]
| pb7 wrote:
| > That argument was accepted with COVID vaccines, so why
| not now?
|
| Far from universally and even in the pockets where it
| was, at least some percentage did it just to be able to
| go back to doing normal things which were gated by
| government rules.
|
| Don't do anything blindly. They won't be the ones bearing
| the cost if and when something goes wrong.
| spicyusername wrote:
| What is there to prove...?
|
| If the goal of toothbrushing and flossing is to remove
| bacteria and food debris from your mouth, hopefully an
| uncontroversial premise, it's pretty obvious how flossing
| helps.
|
| Just flossing and carefully watching the action of the
| floss and the plaque is sufficient to demonstrate the
| benefit.
|
| Sometimes your common sense is more than enough to make
| sense of the world, no ivy league double blind study
| required.
| shard wrote:
| It's a question of return on investment. If spending the
| extra minute everyday saves a probable $10k over your
| lifetime due to dental work, then yes it might be worth
| it. But if it saves a probable $10, it might not.
| kodt wrote:
| Not flossing makes your dental visits longer as they
| scrape off all the plaque from in-between your teeth.
| Just avoiding that discomfort is worth it IMO.
|
| I suppose you could skip going to the dentist altogether
| but that comes with risks of larger issues down the road.
| spicyusername wrote:
| The cost of the dental work pales in comparison to the
| value of keeping your natural teeth, which is going to be
| much much much higher than $10k over your lifetime.
| oarfish wrote:
| I think i read somewhere that the reason for this is that
| virtually all dentists agree you should clean your entire
| tooth, and the consensus is so universal that no one
| bothers to do controlled trials. I would feel bad not
| cleaning half of the surface area at all anyways.
| derbOac wrote:
| Meta-analyses of RCTs do indicate flossing prevents gum
| disease, though, which is important. See another poster in
| this thread who suffered bone loss as a result of gum
| disease.
|
| You're right though that there's no established effect on
| cavities.
|
| Having said that, it's difficult to get people to actually
| floss, so there's a certain amount of uncertainty about the
| results of those RCTs, and whether participants were doing
| what they were supposed to be doing.
| g3e0 wrote:
| Smell the floss ;)
| wingworks wrote:
| I blame movies. Nearly every brushing scene has the actor
| scrub brushing like it's nobodies business.
| christkv wrote:
| Well now I learned something new and very useful. Applying to
| kids tonight.
| PartiallyTyped wrote:
| May I swallow? I find that my breath and tonsils feel fresher.
| lm28469 wrote:
| It's definitely not recommended, at least for fluoride
| toothpaste, it usually is written on the box and the tube
| PartiallyTyped wrote:
| Oh. Thanks for letting me know.
| arbuge wrote:
| Wouldn't that result in the ingestion of a large quantity of
| toothpaste over the course of a lifetime? I can't imagine that
| would be good for you.
| prettyStandard wrote:
| It's just diatoms. We all eat all sorts of things and it's
| fine for the most part. As long as you aren't eating actual
| poison you are fine.
| loa_in_ wrote:
| Fluoride is toxic.
|
| > We all eat all sorts of things and it's fine That's like
| saying you can lose some IQ every so often because you'll
| live so what
| mjburgess wrote:
| Safe: 10 mg/day
|
| Toothpaste: 4mg / teaspoon
|
| So you'd need to swallow several whole teaspoons to pass
| std. safety levels
|
| cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoride
| loa_in_ wrote:
| Safe, means it won't have any detrimental effects, or it
| won't be debilitating, or it won't kill me?
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| That's a good question. Having not seen reliable research
| on that point, my approach is as follows: I use a small
| amount of toothpaste (say, 1/4th of what you see in ads
| or less) and I spit excess. In this way in the worst
| scenario I digest at least one order of magnitude less
| fluoride than the threshold of the safe amount.
| loa_in_ wrote:
| Now I am fairly certain I probably use more than that
| even, but with the complexity of biological systems it
| might be as well saying that being shot with 10 bullets
| is somehow better than with 1000 bullets.
|
| I just point that out, because I am acutely aware how
| good people are at convincing themselves with statistics
| of anything, really.
| beernutz wrote:
| You are actually being hit a lot more by cosmic rays that
| are not deflected by our atmosphere. We survive this
| fine. This is probably a more acurate simile than the
| bullet one, based on the amounts involved.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| The lethal dose is 5-10 grams, the recommended safe dose
| is 10 milligrams maximum. Between those points you'll
| experience some pain and stomach discomfort. Regularly
| going over the safe dose may cause some organ issues.
|
| Basically, even if you swallow all your toothpaste you're
| unlikely to have problems unless your diet is already
| rich in fluoride, and spitting but not rinsing is fine.
| prettyStandard wrote:
| We drink Fluoide in the water.
| bombolo wrote:
| Toothpaste contains a fluoride molecule, not direct
| fluoride. Not the same thing at all.
| ChickenNugger wrote:
| "The dose makes the poison." Even ionizing radiation
| (sunlight) in small doses over a whole lifetime isn't really
| harmful. Especially given that it's how we naturally make
| vitamin D.
| gedy wrote:
| I'm glad to be wrong on that one
| dartharva wrote:
| That just feels nasty though
| jaqalopes wrote:
| This is one where I KNOW I do it wrong. The dentist prescribed
| me a hardcore sensitivity toothpaste for an issue, but
| emphasized that it will only work if I don't rinse after
| brushing. But... I just can't not rinse after 30 years of
| muscle memory. I generally remember this right as I'm rinsing.
| The sensitivity toothpaste has not worked, of course.
| stevenhuang wrote:
| What I find helps is to rinse my tongue (run the bristles
| over my tongue under water, but just the tongue). Then at
| least most of the toothpaste residue sticks to my mouth and
| teeth but not the taste.
| D-Coder wrote:
| Maybe mark the cup with something that will remind you. Clip
| a paperclip over the edge? Store it upside down? (If you're
| using a cup.) This could help interrupt the habit.
| datastoat wrote:
| I'm in the same boat as you -- sensitive teeth, but can't not
| rinse. What works for me is to treat the toothpaste as a
| "post-rinse medicated rub": squeeze out a bit more, and rub
| it over the most sensitive teeth.
| rpdillon wrote:
| Ahh, mine is an interesting counterpoint to this!
|
| I had canker sores for my entire life, well into my late 20s. I
| tried everything: changing toothpastes (more on this in a
| second), changing brushes, using mouthwash, being told my mouth
| was "dirty" and I need to brush more, etc.
|
| Turns out (at least for me) the sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS)
| used as a foaming agent in (almost) every single toothpaste
| causes canker sores. I found "canker sore toothpaste" that
| lacks the SLS, for $7 a tube. I used it for couple of years and
| it worked!
|
| If you read up on SLS, this is not super-surprising. It's a
| known skin irritant, and is known to cause more irritation when
| left on the skin for more than a couple of minutes. Canker
| sores are an autoimmune issue, so my theory is the irritation
| triggers an immune response, leading to the sore.
|
| And then I discovered if I rinse thoroughly (twice) after
| brushing, even with normal toothpaste, I just don't get canker
| sores anymore! Not sure if it's universal, but canker sores
| suck so much, I hope this helps someone suffering like I was.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| TJs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34584009
| karaterobot wrote:
| Yes, I had the same experience. Went 40 years brushing, then
| rinsing, then I read advice similar to the original
| commenter's and stopped rinsing. Shortly after that, I
| wondered why I suddenly had all these weird sores in my
| mouth, and finally connected the dots. They went away
| immediately after I started rinsing again.
| ChadNYC wrote:
| Interesting. I suffered from canker sores into my early 20's.
| Finally talked to a Dr, who sent me to a nutritionist. The
| problem for me was orange juice. I've never been sure what
| exactly it is in OJ that caused the problem. But I do know
| that if I drink a glass of processed orange juice today, I'll
| wake up with a bad canker sore in 2-3 days. If I drink a
| glass of fresh orange juice for a few days in a row, I'll get
| the canker sores.
| jkubicek wrote:
| I've also suffered from canker sores. Vitamin B (B-12 is the
| important one, I think) is a wonder cure. At the first sign
| of mouth soreness I start taking daily doses of Vitamin B and
| it cures the sores right up.
| nativespecies wrote:
| For me and my 2x monthly canker sores, it turned out I was
| severely iron deficient and had anemia. Since taking
| supplements, I haven't had a canker sore in 7 months.
| digianarchist wrote:
| Triamcinolone acetonide oral paste works well for canker
| sores.
|
| Much better than any over the counter stuff.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Not using an electric toothbrush. First time I used one it felt
| like I'd had a proper dental cleaning. An extremely half-assed
| effort with that kind of brush beats a thorough one with a manual
| brush. I thought they were a gimmick, but no, they're amazing.
| coreyhn wrote:
| I just discovered this recently as well. I agree it was better
| than I thought.
| dvirsky wrote:
| Not using a water flosser as well. It always looked to me like
| some novelty shopping channel thing. Then I got one and OMG
| this thing cleans so well, way better than normal flossing
| (which I was usually to lazy to do anyway).
| Frost1x wrote:
| On a similar dental hygiene note, I was told I should brush
| before having breakfast, coffee etc. It always stood to reason
| to me that it makes more sense to just eat my first meal and
| drink, then brush, to keep a cleaner state of my teeth for
| longer but supposedly according to a few dentists I spoke with,
| the protection you get from the first brush is more significant
| than removing those first food particles.
|
| Chances are you already have a lot bacteria in your mouth and
| once you eat your breakfast (which for many is sugary) they
| immediately eat and consume this and produce acid. So, brush
| before breakfast, supposedly.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Yeah if you feel like making your breakfast taste like
| garbage as the toothpaste blocks sweetness receptors.
| thfuran wrote:
| You can get toothpaste without sodium lauryl sulfate.
| moffkalast wrote:
| TIL, that would be interesting to try then. I hope
| they're not overly expensive?
| thfuran wrote:
| I think it's often like 2-3x the price of cheaper brands,
| but that doesn't really add up to much ongoing cost.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Trader Joe's peppermint anticavity toothpaste. Was a bit
| odd at first as it has baking soda in it, but after a
| tube or two I think regular toothpaste is really the odd
| tasting one now. Cheapish.
| high_byte wrote:
| brush before and have a good wash after as well
| jaimehrubiks wrote:
| If I brush before eating the food tastes bad
| vlabakje90 wrote:
| This is due to the foaming agents used in most toothpastes.
| The biggest culprit is sodium lauryl (ether) sulphate
| (SLES/ SLS). These foaming agents are surfactants and they
| bind to certain taste receptors in your mouth, thus
| altering your taste perception. You can avoid this entirely
| by switching your toothpaste to something that uses no
| foaming agents or those of the non-surfactant type.
| ornornor wrote:
| Some people are also allergic to them. I was getting
| canker sores in my mouth for years without understand
| why.
|
| Then my cousin discovered he's allergic to SLS. I quit
| toothpaste with SLS and I never get them anymore. It's
| rare but you never know who else struggles with it and
| doesn't know.
| HPsquared wrote:
| Same, I naturally avoid anything acidic after brushing,
| things like orange juice just taste horrible after
| brushing.
| Georgelemental wrote:
| Seems to me like one should just not eat a sugary breakfast?
| OJFord wrote:
| Acidity is more the issue aiui, I don't really eat
| breakfast typically but my dentist's example was coffee (to
| which I don't add sugar) - drink water after coffee, and
| don't brush for half an hour after.
| jarek83 wrote:
| Funny, all my dentists always urged me to do morning brush
| after breakfast. It seemed to correlate to "brush after each
| meal" thing.
| OJFord wrote:
| Mine says half an hour before or after, which I like
| because it makes sense. He also suggests after lunch, and
| of course in the evening, which obviously comes after
| breakfast - so it's kind of annoying (you know, to the kind
| of person spending time on HN) to leave it at 'brush before
| breakfast not after' or vice versa...
| exitb wrote:
| Since apparently you can get two conflicting "educated"
| opinions, chances are it doesn't matter anyway.
| oarfish wrote:
| I think it's both the bacteria thing - getting rid of them
| before they can start metablizing your food into stuff to
| harm your enamel - and the idea that directly following food
| intake, your mouth pH level will be out of homeostasis and
| enamel may be easier to erode at "non-native" pHs and one
| shouldn't brush directly after. I'm not sure where I got that
| from though.
| Frost1x wrote:
| Yup, both removing them first and then layering a bit of
| protection (fluoride).
| hawk_ wrote:
| This can go wrong in either direction. If you brush your
| teeth and have milk shortly after, the fluoride binds to the
| calcium in milk and goes to your belly instead of staying
| with your teeth protecting them. On the other hand if you
| have orange juice or similar (acidic) and then brush your
| teeth, say bye to your tooth enamel.
| badpun wrote:
| > On the other hand if you have orange juice or similar
| (acidic) and then brush your teeth, say bye to your tooth
| enamel.
|
| How long would you recommend to wait? Or perhaps a good
| rinsing of teeth before brushing would be enough?
| hawk_ wrote:
| Acid loosens the enamel, so careful with anything like
| good rinsing or brushing right after consuming acidic
| items. Just drink some water (optional light rinse) and
| wait around 30 minutes to brush.
|
| * Disclaimer: I am not a dentist, you should find a good
| one and talk to them for real advice.
| wingworks wrote:
| Yep. Thats why they recommended to wait about 30mins after
| brushing before you eat. Also at least 30 mins after
| brushing before eating. Ideally don't graze eat throughout
| the day. Highly recommend checking out the TeethTalk
| YouTube, she's a Dental Hygienist and covers allot of
| dental topics, and it's free. idk where your from, but
| dentists here are crazy expensive.
| https://www.youtube.com/@TeethTalk
| tromp wrote:
| I try to brush before eating and drinking, but on the rare
| occasions I end up brushing afterwards, I wait the better
| part of an hour so that the acids are well enough diluted
| to cause trouble.
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| It's easy to get toothpaste without fluoride
| fxtentacle wrote:
| but what's the point? toothpaste is mostly a fluoride
| delivery mechanism.
| azinman2 wrote:
| You want the fluoride to remineralize your enamel.
| CabSauce wrote:
| Don't brush before or after breakfast. Got it! Thanks!
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| If you follow all health advice, you realize the proper
| response is to just die: it's too complicated.
| FlyingSnake wrote:
| > to just die
|
| But before brushing or after brushing??!!
| Firmwarrior wrote:
| I've only been brushing my teeth before bed for like 6
| years at this point, and flossing once a week or so. I
| don't know if it's the fluoride alcohol mouth wash I use
| or just dumb luck, but I haven't gotten any cavities
|
| So I think that given this rigorous scientific data, you
| can safely avoid brushing for the most part
| CabSauce wrote:
| It's complicated. There's definitely a genetic component
| to having hard teeth.
| danenania wrote:
| A lot of it is diet too. Not eating or drinking sugary
| things gives you much more room for error. Of course you
| still need to brush and floss, but in my experience sugar
| + rigorous cleaning can still leave you with cavities
| whereas no sugar + lax cleaning you're probably fine. No
| sugar + rigorous cleaning and you might never need a
| dentist again. It took me way too long to understand
| this.
| myhf wrote:
| Razors pain you; Rivers are damp; Acids stain you; And
| drugs cause cramp.
|
| Guns aren't lawful; Nooses give; Gas smells awful; You
| might as well live.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| No need to worry, we are all in the process of dying, so
| the correct answer is just to ignore everything that
| isn't either: something that strikes you as incredibly
| obvious (don't drink poison), recognized in its field of
| experts (high cholesterol is bad for you), established
| knowledge, or not too inconvenient.
| smilliken wrote:
| > recognized in its field of experts (high cholesterol is
| bad for you)
|
| Public service announcement: this one is controversial.
| IMHO it's wrong, based on bad science and agendas, and
| harmful because it deters people from nutritious foods. I
| recommend everyone do their own reading to form their own
| opinion.
|
| It's sad how political food and nutrition is because it
| causes misinformation and malnutrition.
| Eisenstein wrote:
| Are you a medical doctor or otherwise considered an
| expert in the field of internal medicine?
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Did you know that after brushing with toothpaste you're
| supposed to just...let the foam hang around in your mouth
| without rinsing it out for 30 minutes? I didn't until
| recently, and now that I do, I'm still not gonna walk
| around with toothpaste foam in my mouth.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| There's a particular prescription strength toothpaste I
| use when I get sensitive teeth. I keep it specifically
| for post-dinner brushing and it's easier to do this at
| that time.
| spelunker wrote:
| Yeah, I learned about this a while ago and now I don't
| rinse my mouth after brushing. Which is weird initially
| but you get used to it.
|
| I _do_ spit out excess toothpaste, which I understand
| still leaves enough toothpaste in your mouth for it to do
| it's thing.
| valarauko wrote:
| How much foam do you end up with? I usually don't rinse
| out the toothpaste after, but I don't end up with a
| foaming mouth after. I use about a pea size amount (as
| recommended on the packaging) and it's not super sudsy
| when I'm finished. Wipe my face and done.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Not too much but it just feels disgusting to me to keep
| all of the food bits still suspended in the foam in my
| mouth.
| icosa wrote:
| I floss first, rinse, then brush. No more food bits left
| after I spit out the extra foam.
| valarauko wrote:
| I'm confused - what food bits? Do you have detectable
| food bits left over after brushing or is it an impression
| that there must be food still left over?
|
| At least for me, I rinse out my mouth before I brush, so
| I don't expect to have detectable gunk left over. I also
| use a tongue scraper after, so I'm usually feeling pretty
| clean when I'm done.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Well both, stuff between the teeth that the brush doesn't
| get (I guess that's why you'd floss after brushing, but
| also with foam in your mouth?), and also just food
| microparticles that would go away when rinsing after
| brushing generally.
| valarauko wrote:
| I suppose it helps to floss before brushing (as
| recommended) but for me personally the stray particle
| isn't something I've worried about. In my mind, the added
| benefit of retaining the fluoride longer outweighs the
| downsides of microparticles of food.
| bmacho wrote:
| If you have food microparticles that would go away, then
| rinse them out, then wash your teeth again and keep that
| foam in.
| tonnydourado wrote:
| I always drink coffee, which is acidic (I think) with milk,
| for breakfast, so I guess I should just give up on teeth?
| rojobuffalo wrote:
| How about mouthwash first thing in the morning to nuke the
| bacteria without coating your mouth in fluoride?
| LouisSayers wrote:
| Dentists I've been to have said not to use mouthwash - it
| kills good bacteria too.
| spoiler wrote:
| Why is there no winning in this situation?! I have never
| realised something as simple as brushing teeth can be so
| nuanced lol
| psychphysic wrote:
| It's not nuanced.
|
| The evidence is just lacking, people are just using
| judgement to advise on something that we can't detect one
| way or another with research.
|
| When it comes to dental care it's not even clear, based
| on research (Cochrane review in 2019) it flossing makes
| any difference let alone a clinically useful difference.
|
| The current advice is just based on reasoning that either
| you brush first or wait a hour after eating due to the
| abrasive action of brushing.
| moffkalast wrote:
| It's not clear because it IS nuanced, and it doesn't have
| the same effect on everyone equally. Two people using the
| exact same dental routine can have vastly different
| results from it.
| psychphysic wrote:
| I'll take the Cochrane opinion that evidence is lacking
| due to low quality small sample short follow up studies
| in those with poor dental hygiene.
|
| Over the random internet randos views.
|
| But thanks none the less!
| spoiler wrote:
| Regarding flossing, at least in my case, it helps with my
| gum disease. If I don't floss for a while my gums start
| to bleed. Although, I use a water floss instead of a
| regular rope floss
| wingworks wrote:
| Yeah, flossing is a good idea if you don't want to get
| gum disease. Also a good idea to learn to floss
| correctly, not just a quick "in and out". (also good idea
| so you don't get cavities on the edges of your teeth.)
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WviE5aa5Ha0 (how to
| floss)
| ornornor wrote:
| I'm glad ifnflossing helps fights cavity but the main
| reason I do it is because it's so gross not to. When you
| don't floss you basically accept to keep bits of rotten
| food between your teeth for days. If you're unconvinced,
| don't floss for a week and then do, see what comes out.
| And don't smell it. I warned you.
| [deleted]
| psychphysic wrote:
| Yeah they really hooked the public with that.
|
| Same with hair, and bacteria on surfaces.
|
| Completely hookwinked Jo public.
| OJFord wrote:
| People's teeth (and brushing technique/effectiveness) are
| way too varied to make such a general statement. I
| flossed for the first time at some point in my 20s, did
| religiously for a year or so thereafter, and still do
| occasionally - but at no point was it like 'how on Earth
| have I not been doing this' or loads of gunk coming out,
| nevermind rotten and smelly. Maybe you have just the
| 'right' tooth gap that it's both too tight for your
| brushing but not so tight that stuff doesn't get stuck.
|
| (And for whatever it's worth, all dental check-ups since
| some point in my early teens at the latest have just been
| a quick look around and yep all good - I'm not saying
| this from a position (touching wood I don't eat my hat
| next time of course) of terrible dental health.)
| wingworks wrote:
| A checkup shouldn't be too quick, there are things they
| should be checking and looking out for:
| https://youtu.be/sDe50j0MFBU?t=95 (Dental Office RED
| FLAGS)
| tonnydourado wrote:
| > People's teeth (and brushing technique/effectiveness)
| are way too varied
|
| You're absolutely correct, because I don't floss that
| often, but every time I do a whole meal comes out, so I'm
| incredibly envious of your naturally clean teeth XD
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| Saliva does help in preventing bacteria build up. [1]
|
| [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1961328/
| moneywoes wrote:
| I guess a diet without those foods is the best solution
|
| Didn't people not brush at all in the past but still had
| perfect teeth?
| kgc wrote:
| They had two sets of teeth and they were perfect for the
| average life expectancy of around 35.
| soiler wrote:
| I'm pretty sure prehistoric people did have primitive
| tooth care, didn't eat junk food and high-sugar diets,
| and still had nasty teeth.
| Firther wrote:
| Genes, climate, and types of local foods play a role too,
| but widespread adoption of agriculture made diets rich in
| carbs and starchy foods possible, which isn't great for
| dental health, and the somewhat recent trend (last 200~
| years) of highly processed foods that are softer and
| easier to chew means there's less mechanisms to deal with
| tooth overcrowding. This has been observed in children
| from hunter gatherer societies, raised on modern diets,
| having worse dental hygiene than their parents.
| abdullahkhalids wrote:
| > Teeth-cleaning twigs have long been used throughout
| human history.[2] As long ago as 3000 B.C., the ancient
| Egyptians constructed crude toothbrushes from twigs and
| leaves to clean their teeth. Similarly, other cultures
| such as the Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Indians also
| cleaned their teeth with twigs. Some would fray one end
| of the twig so that it could penetrate between the teeth
| more effectively.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth_brushing
| coldpie wrote:
| IMO teeth are the worst part of the human body. Hard to
| take care of, will inevitably fail, not replaceable,
| massively painful for even minor injuries. Evolution
| really screwed the pooch on teeth.
| D-Coder wrote:
| Well, teeth perform perhaps the most difficult task of
| the entire body. Take entirely external substances of all
| kinds of textures and densities and contaminants, crush
| all that to tiny particles, try not to get worn down too
| far in the process...
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Teeth are amazing. One of the areas where human crystal
| formation happens. Our modern diets are horrible for
| teeth.
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t4RgBZlKlJI
|
| Evolution expects us to grind away about a millimeter of
| our teeth while we are young by eating rougher things to
| make way for wisdom teeth, for example.
|
| For healthy teeth, you should be very hydrated. If your
| mouth isn't watering, you might not be hydrated enough.
| tete wrote:
| Haven't watched the video, but:
|
| > One of the areas where human crystal formation happens
|
| Especially one of the areas where you want crystals to
| form. Unlike in your urinary and bladders. ;)
| [deleted]
| moffkalast wrote:
| Sharks really got the good teeth genes.
| tete wrote:
| Would be fun too have re-growing teeth, probably not so
| fun to swallow them in those sizes so frequently.
| tete wrote:
| Spines seem to be similar in that regard. Huge "fuckup"
| (bound to fail badly) in many ways, but freed hands.
|
| Feels like engineering: It's all trade-offs.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| People in the past had better teeth than us, it's the
| sugar these days that cause so many dental problems. If
| you ate like those in the past, you similarly will have
| good teeth.
| hawk_ wrote:
| Our diet is nothing like what our teeth evolved for. For
| example for most people, cutting down the amount of
| sugars (down to levels similar to our prehistoric
| ancestors) they consume can go a long way in protecting
| dental health (and general health for that matter)
| bee_rider wrote:
| Somewhere evolution is saying "well I gave you four
| perfectly decent extra molars that you insist on ripping
| out, if you kept those your teeth would be mostly fine
| for however long your are supposed to live. Mid 50's?"
| HPsquared wrote:
| Teeth are the canary in the coal mine. "The canary is the
| worst part of the coal mine, it can hardly handle
| anything!"
| godelski wrote:
| > I have never realised something as simple as brushing
| teeth can be so nuanced lol
|
| I feel like replacing "brushing teeth" with literally
| anything and your sentence is also correct and a good way
| to think. Especially the things we think are easy.
| There's a reason it took us thousands of years to do
| certain things.
| jjice wrote:
| I couldn't imagine consuming anything before brushing my
| teeth, but this is coming from a retainer wearer so I think
| that might have something to do with it.
| born1989 wrote:
| Yes. Best talk on teeth hygiene and anatomy (in that order)
| I've heard - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/patricia-
| corby-d-d-s-i...
| algorias wrote:
| IIRC the reason for this is that antibodies are actually in
| your saliva, which moves around your mouth much less while
| you're sleeping. Thus, bacteria have a more favorable
| environment at night.
| muzani wrote:
| That would explain morning breath.
| ornornor wrote:
| I found that rinsing my mouth after brushing and before
| going to bed with baking soda dissolved in water makes a
| notable difference there.
|
| And don't use Listerine etc, their alcohol content is way
| too high and leads to cancer over time apparently.
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| I've heard that brushing right after eating is really bad for
| your teeth because just after you eat, the bacteria in your
| mouth start producing acid that, for lack of a better word,
| loosens the surface enamel in your teeth, and brushing in
| that state discards that enamel instead of letting it
| resettle after the acid washes away.
|
| The solubility of enamel is insanely low so the effect should
| be minor at most, but still.
| bxhsjbaian wrote:
| I switched back from an electric toothbrush to a regular one.
| My biggest issue withthe electric tooth brushes, distractions.
| You have 2 mins, 30 seconds for each quadrant. If while I brush
| someone talks to me e.g. what do you want for breakfast, or you
| see something that distracts you e.g s spec of dust on the
| mirror that you quickly clean up. I end up feeling like I didnt
| do a good job on one of the quadrants. Yes you can start over
| and do more but I generally dont. So I wanted to get rid of the
| artificial 2 min time limit. :)
| arcticfox wrote:
| This reasoning is completely foreign to me.
|
| You're ditching it because sometimes you lose track of the
| time (and don't want to push the button again) for something
| that doesn't have a timer at all?
| bxhsjbaian wrote:
| I generally take my time and am very thorough in brushing
| my teeth. It just works for me. Had my first and only
| cavity in my mid 30s. I floss everyday. To me it seemed
| like needlessly complicating something simple.
|
| Must say, I just checked back HN and am surprised by this
| comment all grayed out. It is a real experience and life
| choice that's working for me. Not sure what to make of it.
| Guess just don't bother disagreeing online :)
| giantg2 wrote:
| Somebody asks you what you want for breakfast?
|
| Clearly youve figured something out and I've been doing
| something wrong my whole life.
| itisit wrote:
| This setting you refer to can be disabled on most every
| Philips electric toothbrush that has it.
| thiht wrote:
| I have a basic Oral-B electric tooth brush and you can
| actually "pause" it. I gag easily so I sometimes need to turn
| it off, and when I restart it it remembers where it was. So
| sometimes I restart it, continue what I was doing and it
| buzzes after 5-10 seconds because I was almost finished.
|
| If a basic model does it, I'd guess they all do it!
|
| Also don't forget you can ignore the vibrations, just
| continue after the 2 minutes and count in your head if you
| need it.
| petodo wrote:
| This. I discovered electric toothbrush in my mid 30s, I have
| good teeth and brushed already with regular toobrush pretty
| good, but to be really thorough I had to be always tired after
| brushing, now with electric toothbrush I can achieve same
| result with less energy, less tired.
|
| Btw. I went through bunch of cheap noname toothbrushes to
| realize there is reason you pay for Philips and Oral-B brands,
| all cheap toothbrushes will fail within few weeks/months due to
| humidity or other failures, didn't have such experience with
| those two famous brands, wife and me use Oral-B Pulsonic Slim
| for years (extremely slim and light, but less powerful), for
| son who had problem with teeth I bought a bit better (heavier
| but more powerful) Philips HX6511 (still quite cheap, next time
| I'd buy this also for myself). Daughter has still cheap Xiaomi,
| waiting when it will finally break (from 4 I bought 3 broken),
| then will probably go for same Philips.
|
| Btw. be aware most of the electric toothbrushes still use old
| NiCd batteries with memory effect, so to achieve maximum
| battery life/longetivity you should NOT leave tootbrush in
| charger, but charge it only when it runs out of battery, if you
| keep it in charger stand it is significantly decreasing battery
| life with each charging to the point it is useless already by
| the end of warranty.
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| My dentist told me I should only use a sonic toothbrush
| Sonicare or similar because they actually clean while
| rotational electronic toothbrushes almost literally sweep the
| crap to under your gums (so they clean the teeth but harm gum
| gealth).
| havaloc wrote:
| Mine told me the rotational ones are better. And I think
| there's some empirical evidence there because when they
| polish your teeth, they use a rotational tool.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| Disagreed; bought and used multiple electric toothbrushes and
| quickly stopped. I felt I always did a better job myself; turns
| out I instinctually brushed for 2 minutes minimum and ensured I
| didn't just do the circular motion (as the dentist pointed out
| the second and last time I went to one in my life). Also, I
| never flossed, I have an anecdotal theory that if you never
| floss you never open the gaps in your teeth so it's actually
| better. Touch wood haven't had to do anything to my teeth even
| though my dietary habits are some of the worst anyone around me
| has seen
| toxik wrote:
| Some people just don't get cavities very easily. You are
| extrapolating from that.
|
| Floss. For the love of God, floss. People carry around
| chronic gum infections in between teeth. Ask me how I know.
| altdataseller wrote:
| How do you know?
| AuthorizedCust wrote:
| Except the evidence on flossing isn't strongly in its
| favor: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/tossing-
| flossing-2016081...
| Oddskar wrote:
| Of course anecdotal evidence, but I solved the recurring
| inflammation issues I had by having a routine that
| includes flossing an interdental brushes.
|
| At a certain point you know where your "problem areas"
| are and where food tend to get stuck.
| toxik wrote:
| Same thing here, I think this is really common and the
| "lack of evidence" as the article tries to frame it is
| just because it's so obvious.
|
| There is also a lack of peer reviewed studies showing
| that you can drown in water but that doesn't mean it
| isn't true.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| What evidence do you have to support flossing being
| effective in people who have never flossed in their life
| (such population exists?) who also brush well..
| aatd86 wrote:
| I don't know wvy you are downvoted.
|
| So have I. And several dentists have actually recommended
| manual brushing to me as well.
|
| On the other hand, water flossing has been a boon against
| dental plaque and bad breath. I used to never floss.
|
| Disgusting mistake... A lot of food particles get stuck in
| the teeth interstitial spaces, macerating in there overnight
| or even several days... Yuck. :x
| kirso wrote:
| Literally discovered this only a month ago :( I wish I've done
| it sooner.
| rjh29 wrote:
| I've tried both water jets and electric toothbrushes and they
| do nothing for me. In particular the tiny circular brush just
| didn't feel as good as the full-sized bristles on a normal
| brush. I didn't feel as clean afterwards.
| J_cst wrote:
| I had the exact same experience. I always thought that the
| electric toothbrush was something for lazy ppl, then only
| recently - spotting one of the best electric brushes heavily
| discounted - I bought it. I felt I never had my teeth so clean.
| A game changer.
| matwood wrote:
| Not just electric, but a SonicCare style brush. It's like
| leaving the dentist every time I brush.
| imglorp wrote:
| This. It's not really an electric toothbrush but you get far
| cleaner than one. My dentist is insistent.
|
| I've had the same base model for 10+ years going strong.
| ornornor wrote:
| It's hard to trust dentists on this when they're all in the
| pocket of either Oral B or Sonicare and will recommend
| whichever one pays them.
|
| Ditto "vet" food for pets, they're very biased.
| Wohlf wrote:
| fwiw my dentist doesn't shill any products and still
| highly recommends an electric brush, even the worst ones
| are better than you can do yourself. She also said a
| water flosser is great for gum health but to still use
| floss at least a few times a week because they can
| struggle with large bits getting stuck where the teeth
| make contact.
| abdullahkhalids wrote:
| There is no conclusive evidence that flossing is helpful.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_floss#Evidence
| ornornor wrote:
| Maybe. A roll of floss is 3$ and 5 minutes a day. A
| filling at the dentist is 300-500$ and lasts 5-10 years
| before needing to be replaced + the pain. I'd rather
| floss just in case, it's a cheap insurance policy at best
| and it does nothing at worst.
| [deleted]
| fatnoah wrote:
| > Not using an electric toothbrush. First time I used one it
| felt like I'd had a proper dental cleaning.
|
| Same here. It's completely changed my life. For mini-me, the
| built-in timer helps them be sure to brush enough.
| kibwen wrote:
| For ADHD brain, the timer built into the toothbrush makes all
| the difference. Sometimes that 30 second interval feels like
| five seconds, and sometimes I could swear it's been five
| minutes and I start wondering if it's broken. Nope, that's
| just ADHD time blindness. I almost certainly never brushed
| for anywhere close to long enough prior to my electric
| toothbrush.
| fatnoah wrote:
| Mini-me also has ADHD and the electric toothbrush has made
| trips to the dentist far more enjoyable.
| vultour wrote:
| I wish there was a way to change the timer because I find it
| ridiculously short, I'm usually barely halfway through when
| the entire cycle is finished.
| browningstreet wrote:
| My electric vibrates the timer.. I just brush each quarter
| of my mouth for each timer period. The vibration is
| annoying, but it's a routine that works for me.
| LeonenTheDK wrote:
| Can confirm, I couldn't get over how clean my teeth felt the
| first time I used an electric toothbrush in adulthood. The
| vibrating rattled my skull at first though, that took a few
| sessions to get used to haha.
| champagnepapi wrote:
| THIS! I used to get like 5 cavaites a year, costing me between
| $300-$900 a year with insurance (US). Then i spent like $120 on
| an electric toothbrush, nothing ever since, and my gums are so
| much healthier according to my dentist. I learned this at age
| 29. Wish i used them years earlier!
| xyzelement wrote:
| Yup! Also the Phillips ones are just based on vibration (as
| opposed to some rotation in oral-b) which is also much better
| for your teeth and gums.
| pelagic_sky wrote:
| Huh, my dentist told me not to get the oral-b because the
| rotation is bad for your teeth. They mentioned sonic as the
| preferred because the motion matches the grain of your teeth.
| gambiting wrote:
| Or the Oral-B equivalent, the Pulsonic. I found it to be a
| great upgrade from my old electric toothrush(and it seems a
| lot more higenic too, because there are no spaces between the
| bristles in the head to allow movement, since the entire head
| is vibrating).
| BilalBudhani wrote:
| I'm about to order one for myself. Which model are you using?
| I'm thinking of getting 5100.
| wafflemaker wrote:
| got a diamondclean and it took out some plaque that I
| couldn't get rid off for a long time.
|
| Used Chinese knock off for a long time, a Soocas. Recently
| thought about upgrading from $30 Chinese to $80 Chinese
| (OClean), the latter failed after 2 months. YMMMV ofc, but
| after that, and reading on HN about Chinese stealing IP
| from Europe, we thought about getting a Phillips (which my
| dentist recommended). It was a Black Friday deal, and
| knowing the differene between 5100 or 5XXX and one of the
| top brushes, Diamondclean, was like 1/4th of a dentist
| visit - we got the latter. And both me and wife think it's
| awesome. + you get a travel etui. The app sucks just like
| the Soocas and OClean app, but the vibration every 30s is
| enough "smartness" for me.
|
| Funny that the cheap Chinese sonic brush (Soocas) is still
| working well and I'm thinking about getting a shoe cleaning
| brush set for it.
|
| Phillips toothbrush doesn't last as long on one charge as
| the Chinese brushes do.
| fdgsdfogijq wrote:
| One word of advice: The more expensive ones are better. You
| dont need to spend 200$, but the 80$ one is much better
| than a 30$ one.
| guskel wrote:
| What makes you say that? From what I've seen they all use
| the same actuator.
| ornornor wrote:
| That's not the case for the Oral B ones. They're pretty
| much all the same, but the more expensive ones have more
| blinken lights and sometimes an app.
| SpaghettiX wrote:
| Many people (including myself) have found their "sonicare"
| toothbrush break within 6 months. I got mine replaced under
| warranty, and it broke again after 1 year.
|
| Why does a 3 year old video for repairing Sonicare toothbrush
| have 425K reviews on YouTube:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3PBPU2jXbo, with 2.8K
| upvotes and 192 downvotes. It breaks because a screw goes
| loose inside the toothbrush.
|
| I recommend you avoid Phillips electric toothbrush
| completely. I used a oral-B electric toothbrush for at least
| 8 years with no issues. And Phillips breaks in 6 months.
| pawelduda wrote:
| We replaced their sonicare toothbrush twice already. First
| one somehow ended up getting water inside and stopped
| working, second one I think had bent the toothbrush mount
| too much and it also would disconnect - could've been user
| error because it was unintentionally pushed harder than it
| was required. IMO they still have decent price and
| durability otherwise, compared to everything else so far,
| and no stupid gimmicks such as an app, lol.
| zucked wrote:
| I have three different Sonicare toothbrushes in my house,
| ranging from 2 years old to probably pushing 5 years old.
| They've all been flawless - even the one my kiddo uses and
| abuses.
| wwalexander wrote:
| Mine broke after 2 years, but I think that's because I
| dropped it, pointy-side down, onto tile, without a brush
| head on it.
| navan wrote:
| My soniccare is more than 8 years old and is working fine.
| bena wrote:
| YMMV, because I just replaced my 6-ish year old Sonicare
| because the motor seemed like it was dying out.
|
| I say 6-ish, but it's got to be longer than that, because
| it was three addresses and a job ago.
| josephpmay wrote:
| I've used the same Sonicare toothbrush for 20 years. It
| somehow still holds a nearly month-long charge. It's sad to
| hear their quality has gone downhill
| bckr wrote:
| Gentle reminder to anyone reading this to replace the
| bristle head regularly...!
| guskel wrote:
| I've wondered the same. The reason is that they aren't
| waterproof and water leaks onto the circuit board.
|
| I recommend buying the cheapest option and getting a
| warranty with them. I wish Philips could just figure out
| how to waterproof them properly instead of creating so much
| waste.
| adamsmith143 wrote:
| Pure anecdata. My own says that my Sonicare has been
| bulletproof and has survived years of use and international
| travel.
| mwigdahl wrote:
| Same here. We have four and all have worked excellently
| for years.
| informalo wrote:
| Something related I came to know only recently is that it has
| been shown to be more effective to floss _before_ brushing
| teeth. I have been doing it the other way around my entire
| life.
| Kiro wrote:
| Don't you leave a lot of scraps after flossing? Not brushing
| afterwards is unthinkable to me.
| ericol wrote:
| Some 15+ years ago (Don't quite remember the year, probably
| 2005) I bought myself an electric brush. My gf at the time
| mocked me for wasting money on "such an useless thing".
|
| A few months later she went together with her sister to their
| annual dentist checkup. The dentist praised her sister for how
| clean her teeth were, while he told my gf hers were "OK". What
| was it that her sister was doing differently? She was using an
| electric toothbrush.
|
| I'm pretty certain you can guess what was the very first thing
| my then gf did coming out of the dentist.
| e40 wrote:
| Try using a water flosser after regular floss. You will be
| genuinely surprised how much crap comes out. Since I started
| that routine, my hygienist has become extra friendly and chatty
| and say she loves working on my teeth.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| On the flip side, don't brush your gums too much with an
| electric toothbrush.
|
| I destroyed my gums when my parents got me an electric
| toothbrush when I was 13 - and AFAIK - there's still not really
| any way to repair it.
|
| Please, someone correct me if I'm wrong! Would make my day to
| be wrong.
| aszantu wrote:
| I don't know if this will work, depending if they're scarred
| or open, gelatine might work, add to warm water until
| dissolved, then keep in mouth for a while then swallow - I
| used to have reflux, gelatine helped a lot - it's also good
| for joint-pain (if u still have jelly in the joints that can
| be replenished)
| danparsonson wrote:
| I'm sorry this doesn't sound plausible - any links you
| could share? How does gelatine repair gums, or travel from
| your stomach to your joints without being broken down
| somewhere along the way?
| ornornor wrote:
| Same here. Nothing to do as stopping the hard brushing
| stopped recession progress and gum graft is a heavy,
| expensive procedure that definitely leaves marks on the gums.
| It also makes me queasy knowing you're basically getting gums
| grafted from a donor who died. Mine are recessed enough that
| it can get painful brushing after eating too acidic foods but
| not enough to justify the procedure. For acidic foods, I
| rinse my mouth with baking soda dissolved in water right
| after eating and it helps a lot. Dentists can also apply
| fluoride to the exposed parts but it tastes horrible while
| they do it, and only lasts a few weeks before it's gone.
| wingworks wrote:
| If you can get it, try use some Biomin F toothpaste for a
| good few weeks. I've got exposed parts of lower teeth too
| due to over brushing. This toothpaste goes a looong way to
| reducing sensitivity to near zero levels.
| graeme wrote:
| Pretty sure they can do a gum graft by taking piece of the
| roof of your mouth
| wingworks wrote:
| Yeah, this! Also, if you still use manual brush (don't), use
| soft bristle and be gental. Harder is not better when it
| comes to tooth brushing. Don't do what you typically see in
| movies.
|
| As for your gums, they don't grow back I believe, but you can
| get surgery of sorts by using other parts of your mouth and
| stick them in your gums. See;
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF6EgSM5TlA
| jasongrout wrote:
| If it's gum recession, you could try talking to a
| periodontist about a gum graft.
| browningstreet wrote:
| I used to brush and avoid touching my gums.. then I had a
| dentist insist I should also be brushing across my gum lines
| to keep them healthy. So, not sure if you went crazy with the
| electric, or if maybe it was something else? Also, not sure
| if you called 5 dentists if you'd get 1, or more than 1
| opinion on this. But I am told I have healthy gyms and I do
| brush over the line between tooth and gum.
| solarmist wrote:
| My guess would be too much pressure and too much focus on
| the gums. Get all the way to the gums but don't brush
| directly on them, just angle the tip to barely touch the
| gums.
| aszantu wrote:
| I recently learned, that you can use crushed eggshells to
| replenish calcium in teeth, just add them to the toothe paste.
| (I use a canine supplement)
|
| If you're teeth-grinder at night, a few tiny pieces of
| eggshells help keep the grinding at bay, because you can grind
| on a piece of eggshell without danger and then relax again.
| acomms wrote:
| Are you saying this method is to sleep with eggshells in your
| mouth?
| moffkalast wrote:
| Jesse, what the hell are you talking about?
| sergiosgc wrote:
| This, but for water jet flossing. Why did I muck around for
| decades with strings in my mouth? A water jet is a lot less
| effort and much much more efficient/effective.
|
| P.S. If you never tried these gizmos, get a portable, battery
| powered one, so you can use it over the bathtub (or in the
| bathtub). They tend to soak everything around you.
| hanniabu wrote:
| I never got used to water flossing, how do you know where to
| aim it while it's in your mouth? Are you literally dragging
| the tip across your gum line? I always had trouble getting
| the proper angle (perpendicular to teeth) and then when it
| comes to the front teeth it's impossible to do behind them
| because the tips don't have enough of an angle to them and
| you're also shooting water everywhere.
| worthless-trash wrote:
| I saw these, but they felt a bit scammy, what model are you
| using ?
| kccqzy wrote:
| I have the cheapest Waterpik and it's still amazing how
| much the water jet helps with dislodging various food bits
| trapped between teeth.
| Version467 wrote:
| Not who you were asking, but I use a Waterpik WP-100 and
| I'm very happy with it. According to my dentist they are
| less effective than normal flossing, but I hate flossing
| and was never able to do it on a regular basis, whereas I
| use the Waterpik once a day.
|
| I worked my way up to a fairly high pressure and it
| regularly removes stuff that I missed with my electric
| toothbrush. It also leaves you with a very fresh and clean
| mouth feel.
|
| I also wasn't very sure about them when I first looked into
| it, but it's really not a snake-oil product. It's also not
| the holy grail of dental health, just a reasonable
| alternative to flossing.
| TurkishPoptart wrote:
| How do you clean these out? It's gotten backed up due to
| water deposits and no longer gives the nice pressure
| feeling.
| kubanczyk wrote:
| I use Panasonic EW-1211W. Much better than brushing.
| mturmon wrote:
| I have a Waterpik cordless and it has been very good - the
| industrial design is meh but it does the job. It's nice to
| have a simple handheld unit. I have some gaps between teeth
| that can trap food and cause gum disease.
|
| It's used in combination with brushing, of course - water-
| pik then brush.
|
| It's a WF-02 ... it's the kind with 3 AA cells that I have
| rechargeables in (this is better for my bathroom setup).
| arcticfox wrote:
| 100%, and just a quick note that the quality of the brush makes
| a surprising difference. I was always skimping and buying
| $5-$10 electric toothbrushes when I tried in the past and was
| underwhelmed.
|
| I finally tried a name brand brush from Costco when my wife
| insisted and it blew my mind. Actually excited to go to the
| dentist to see what they say this time when I'm not full of
| plaque for once
| mooreds wrote:
| I wanted to be sold on an electric toothbrush, but I've only
| used one off and on.
|
| How did you get into the habit?
| gwbas1c wrote:
| I go to two different hygienists and they both recommended
| the fancy Sonicare.
|
| Specifically, the one you connect to your phone coaches you
| on the right amount of pressure and time to use throughout
| your mouth.
| ornornor wrote:
| Because they get money from Sonicare for selling them. They
| might really be better but how can you trust dentists on
| this when they're all bought by either Oral B or Sonicare
| :(
| bckr wrote:
| > an electric toothbrush, but I've only used one off and on
|
| There's a good little joke in here.
|
| FWIW, I've gone back and forth on electric toothbrushes and
| settled on non-electric. I've found that a medium-firmness
| bristle and a rigorous and thorough brushing is what leaves
| me feeling cleanest. Plus it's simple, easy to replace, and
| easier to properly dispose of.
|
| Then again, maybe a super high end electric would change my
| mind.
| johnmaguire wrote:
| Out of curiosity which toothbrushes have you tried? I've
| been using a Sonicare and on the few occasions I've needed
| to use a manual toothbrush since it's been night-and-day.
| bckr wrote:
| It's been years since I used electric, couldn't tell ya
| rjh29 wrote:
| I was not impressed either, but I used a fairly cheap one.
| The people raving about them seem to have spent quite a lot
| on a high-end toothbrush. Manual brushing always feels good
| to me though.
|
| Maybe it's like a lot of things - expensive coffee beans,
| 144 Hz monitors, dvorak keyboards - the "it's
| lifechanging!" people are vocal, but 99.9% of people don't
| care about it at all.
| rjh29 wrote:
| 1. Buy an electric toothbrush 2. Throw away all of your old
| toothbrushes
| aighaelitjlaiw wrote:
| I had the exact opposite experience. I bought a Sonicare
| Diamondwhatever and was incredibly disappointed. After two or
| three months of using that I had visible stains on my teeth
| that had never been there before. So now I'm back to manual
| brushing and I've had no significant problems.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| I spent the first 25+ years of my life[1] thinking that
| philosophy, logic and reason were the most powerful and effective
| tools for driving and guiding my life.
|
| Nope!
|
| [1] OK, maybe not my whole like but at least from 10-11 onwards.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| Chef knives are designed to be held by pinching the blade between
| the forefinger and the thumb, and wrapping the rest of your
| fingers around the handle. I used to wrap all my fingers around
| the handle, until Jacques Pepin showed me how to do it properly:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMA2SqaDgG8
| softfalcon wrote:
| This only applies to Western style knives.
|
| I was taught to choke up on the blade by a Western chef as
| well.
|
| Then I went to Japan and was told to only hold the handle for
| their style of knives. Apparently, they balance the weight of
| the blade and handle differently there.
|
| I tried to choke up on the blade at a very professional knife
| store in a market and was immediately corrected by one of the
| Japanese chefs there.
|
| Then, the following evening, we went to a Michelin star rated
| kaiseki, all of the chefs were holding the knives by only the
| handle, no choking.
|
| I realized I probably looked very foreign choking up on the
| blade in that store earlier. Humbling moment!
| secondcoming wrote:
| Jacques 'scrape your fork in your non-stick pan' Pepin?
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s10etP1p2bU
| linsomniac wrote:
| Absolutely. And just work on your knife skills a little bit
| every time you cook. "The claw" for slicing things makes it so
| much faster and safer. And keep those tools sharp, a few months
| ago I finally got a whetstone set and stopped using a diamond
| steel to half-ass it, and it's a game changer.
| throwanem wrote:
| An ex with commercial kitchen experience taught me this. My own
| experience is that, having held and used a knife the right way
| even once, the wrong way _feels_ wrong forever after.
| softfalcon wrote:
| Tell that to my wife and in-laws. They've asked to be taught,
| been shown how to do it, shown why it's safer and faster,
| have timed their speed and found it to be faster.
|
| They still refuse to do the proper technique. They cut
| themselves regularly. Their stubbornness knows no bounds.
| Even when it involves literal blood at least once a week.
| solarmist wrote:
| It isn't just about the grip. The stance also matters. I
| had trouble using a knife well for a long time because I
| would position myself parallel to the cutting board, which
| meant I would bend my wrist when using a knife.
|
| Once I realized my wrist should be straight when using a
| knife and adjusted my stance to be slightly angled away
| from the cutting board, my knife skills leveled up a ton.
| rramadass wrote:
| Dang! I just finished watching your half-hour video on how to
| cut/dice vegetables :-)
|
| There is something which grabs your attention and fills you
| with admiration when you see a Master displaying his expertise
| so effortlessly and easily.
|
| I am now going to watch more of Mr. Jacques Pepin.
| bgilroy26 wrote:
| His chicken ballotine is a great video
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Chefs will hold different knives different ways dele ding on
| what they're doing. That said, I also do a pinch grip for
| chopping.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| The assistant in that video talks about holding the knife
| around where the center of the weight of the knife is. This
| spot is different knife to knife. So, knives with a heavier
| handle are designed to be held by the handle.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| The pinch grip is the correct default for all knives in the
| classic "chef knife" shape and their derivatives like
| santoku. The exceptions are based on the application, not the
| knife; for example when cutting through a chicken leg joint
| you might want to exchange some control for power and a lot
| of cooks will use a full handle grip then.
|
| The only cooking knives really meant to be held always by the
| handle entirely are heavy butcher cleavers, that have all the
| weight in the blade and you're meant to sling it around. Even
| a paring knife is often best used by holding the blade.
| [deleted]
| lisper wrote:
| Not using a meat thermometer, especially when cooking fish, and
| extra especially when cooking halibut, which is ridiculously
| touchy and easy to overcook. Now I used a thermometer to get the
| interior to exactly 120F and it comes out perfect every time.
| linuxftw wrote:
| I can't imagine dealers and manufacturers agreeing to fix these
| vehicles on their dime. I can't imagine the charging station
| owners offering to fix the vehicles on their dime.
|
| I think the only option for these people will be to file an
| insurance claim, let the insurance company sort out who's at
| fault and try to pursue them.
| tyincdyon wrote:
| Using cannabis recreationally, regularly.
|
| I've voted twice to (successfully) repeal prohibition laws in
| states I've lived in, and would do it again.
|
| Cannabis dependency is real however, and it's the "safe" drug
| compared to, say, heroin; but I'd recommend taking breaks, or
| consider stopping.
| ugjka wrote:
| How bad are Cannabis withdrawals compared to tobacco?
| high_byte wrote:
| it's psychological so it is different.
|
| from my experience I could simply outright stop and be fine
| with it. I might want later on, I might not, but it wasn't
| physical dependency.
|
| what I realized many years ago is that getting "high" is,
| imho, actually overdosing. you should treat it like any other
| drug. let's say you wouldn't want to overdose on ibuprofen
| for example, or sleeping pills. you could but the outcome
| reverses to negative. so the same is for cannabis, you want
| to hit just the sweet spot. the problem is that every strain
| is different, it is also heavily based on your situation
| (e.g. same amount could have very different effects if you're
| hungry/thirsty or even just in a different mood; same with
| different strains) and these (more often than not) don't come
| with a prescription and well defined dose.
|
| you would be surprised how little it takes to "overdose"
| (according to my definition, ie. get high) and how little you
| actually need to gain the positive effects while avoiding
| negative effects. for that I realized smoking socially helps
| a ton, but you still need to be accountable for yourself.
|
| personally I rarely smoke weed now since I very rarely get
| net positive effects. when I do it performs miracles, but
| more often than not it's neutral or net negative effect.
| maybe it changes with age. a lot of people say they remember
| it differently from when they were younger.
| dangwhy wrote:
| * life becomes less fun for a while
|
| * lots of anxiety especially during bedtime
|
| * nightmares are the worst first few days. Makes me shudder
| just thinking about it.
| Spinnaker_ wrote:
| Cannabis withdrawals are worse initially, but easier over
| time. With Cannabis, sleep and mood are really effected, but
| it subsides pretty quickly.
|
| I smoked both for a decade. Haven't craved weed in years, but
| still crave tobacco pretty regularly.
| tyincdyon wrote:
| Depends on how heavily you're using.
|
| If you're smoking all day and quit cold turkey, you'll be
| cranky for a few days either way. The craving for nicotine
| never feels _completely_ gone, unlike cannabis. (Neither were
| as hard as alcohol.)
|
| Quitting/pausing the use of cannabis has some immediate
| _benefits_ compared to nicotine, more energy, fewer mood
| swings, your dreams come back.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| Nightmares were the worst part for me. Cannabis prevented me
| from really dreaming for several years so every dream was
| super vivid for the first few weeks after I stopped smoking.
|
| That and learning to enjoy things sober again. Movies/tv
| shows are harder to pay attention to when not high. The first
| few weeks they were painfully boring.
| hypertele-Xii wrote:
| Breathing.
|
| I was sucking my gut in on inhale, and expanding it on exhale.
| Once I tried it the other way around, it locked and I've breathed
| this new way ever since.
|
| It's obvious to give your lungs more room, couldn't believe to
| have been doing something so basic wrong.
| Laaas wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaphragmatic_breathing
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| The first part of learning to play a wind instrument (clarinet,
| flute, trumpet, etc.) is learning how to breathe.
|
| Muscles can only do two things: contract and relax. Lungs are
| controlled by two muscle groups: the diaphragm and the chest.
|
| The muscles in the front of the chest are the most obvious, and
| the least important: they only squeeze the air out, which
| doesn't really take active effort most of the time.
|
| The diaphragm is what pulls air _in_ to the lungs. It does this
| by pulling the lungs straight _down_ toward the stomach.
|
| Practicing this intentionally, by pulling your diagram down and
| holding it, is great exercise. Deeper slower breaths are more
| effective at cycling oxygen and CO2 through the blood stream,
| help you speak louder and longer, and can even significantly
| reduce your stress level.
|
| Breathing is something we do automatically well enough, but
| breathing intentionally is incredibly useful.
| mattpallissard wrote:
| I used to be a smoker. I started at a very young age. For the
| longest time I would carelessly flick cigarette butts.
|
| One day it dawned on me that I was littering.
|
| Odd thing was I never littered outside of that. In fact cleaning
| up litter was part of my job at the time.
| high_byte wrote:
| good for you. if you gonna smoke at least don't litter :)
| thyrox wrote:
| Worrying and arguing about things in the future.
|
| I wasted so much time and energy on this but as I get older I've
| realised there is so little of what we can actually control vs
| what we think we can do. Most of the time just saying Yes and
| waiting for things to actually happen is so much easier. A lot of
| time what you worry about never happens and if it does it isn't
| always as bad as you make things out to be in your head. A lot of
| times it turns out to be actually good and it would've been a
| shame to avoid it.
|
| Also when you say yes to people, a lot of time the other person
| never actually follows through the thing you didn't want. Otoh if
| you would argue or say No beforehand it always has the opposite
| effect.
|
| I guess for most people this is common sense but I did this wrong
| for a large younger part of my life.
| ThalesX wrote:
| I argue for the future so much. I hope to be able to at one
| point get rid of my anxiety about it. But:
|
| > Also when you say yes to people, a lot of time the other
| person never actually follows through the thing you didn't
| want. Otoh if you would argue or say No beforehand it always
| has the opposite effect.
|
| I recently started doing this and it's amazing. I was the one
| saying 'no' to so many 'offers' (as a full stack developer,
| from idea people), and always ended up being the negative guy
| that doesn't want to do things.
|
| Recently I've started enthousiastically saying "Yeah, that
| sounds great! In order to get started, I'd need
| <whatever_thing_that_they_need_to_do> from you.". Up till now
| no one has followed up. When we talk about it next, I am as
| excited as in the beginning and mentioned the thing that they
| need to do again, and they usually go like "Oh yeah! I need to
| do that." and then I never hear about it again. It's a shocker
| to me.
| solarmist wrote:
| Ok, this makes more sense. Like asking you to do something
| that requires effort. Like group projects from HS. Or "wanna
| start a startup with me?"
| ianmcgowan wrote:
| AKA, the "Wally Reflector", https://imgur.com/Db0c9eP
|
| It's really easy for people to put stuff on your to-do list,
| reflecting even a tiny task on them before you accept it
| makes so many requests go away.
|
| Related to this for me, I generally make it clear that
| sending an email request does not mean a task is transferred
| to me. We need to have a conversation and agree before it
| goes on my list..
| solarmist wrote:
| Yes. You don't even need to be unreasonable.
|
| Just a tiny clarification that requires 20 minutes of work
| is plenty.
|
| Yes to this too! Conscious business taught me all about the
| difference between reasonable and unreasonable requests how
| to make reasonable ones. There's more pieces than I
| expected.
| halkony wrote:
| Scott Adams goes in more detail on this in his "How to
| Fail" book. He says that after Dilbert, he got tons of
| requests to meet with amateur comic artists. He said the
| best filter was to ask them to prepare a list of questions
| for their meeting and that filtered out 98% of the people
| who contacted him.
|
| He also noted that the people who actually did it would
| follow through and one such person was the author of
| "Pearls before Swine".
| musingsole wrote:
| People like dreaming more than they enjoy actualization.
| Pulling dreams into reality is hard work and necessarily
| heartbreaking as reality and dreams don't match.
| cloogshicer wrote:
| I feel this strongly, but it's very hard for me to stop
| worrying anyways. Any specific tips?
| sirmarksalot wrote:
| People see something like this and say "wow, <basic human
| emotion/instinct> isn't doing anything for me, how can I get
| rid of it?" and it becomes a sort of self-gaslighting. You're
| worrying about the future because it serves a function, or
| has served a function in the past. Find out what it's doing
| for you, and figure out something else you can do instead. Or
| maybe come to the conclusion that it actually is helping you,
| and accept that part of yourself.
|
| Maybe you can acknowledge your worry, and rather than
| ruminating on it and letting it eat at you, you can come up
| with a plan to deal with the thing that's worrying you. Maybe
| that plan is to wait until it specifically requires your
| action, and give yourself permission to not worry about it
| for now.
| jameal wrote:
| You might be interested in reading The Mindful Path through
| Worry and Rumination by Dr. Sameet Kumar. I've read it
| multiple times and worked through it with many of my friends.
| A game changer for me. He makes a great case, backed up by
| scientific evidence, for a regular mindfulness practice can
| help with worry and rumination.
| solarmist wrote:
| A big part of relieving worry is accepting that no matter
| what you do bad things do and will happen. It all comes down
| to being comfortable with uncertainty.
|
| There are many ways of doing this, but consciously
| recognizing it and labeling is as such then allowing yourself
| to be okay with the possibility of the bad thing happening.
|
| If it is a big worry sometimes you need to make it as
| specific as possible. Like getting fired. What exact steps
| would happen? What would your boss say specifically? And is
| that exact scenario likely to happen?
|
| If you're still having trouble do the above, but at the end
| change who its about, to a co-worker for example, then ask
| again is this a likely scenario. And if it is then the
| outcome won't be that bad. If it isn't then you also have
| your answer.
|
| Another is to describe the worry in detail to another person
| because to describe it you need to make it specific and
| linearize it. This is why talking it/rubber ducking out works
| so well. They can also point out gaps and whatnot. Usually my
| the time your done the worry is gone.
|
| Many friends feel like they're not actually helping here, but
| just listening is the help and it makes a big difference. On
| the flip side you may feel like you're wasting the other
| person's time because at the end there's nothing to do. His
| is also false, most people are happy to help even if they
| don't know what they did.
|
| Anxiety/worry usually comes from unexamined fears which throw
| every possible bad result into your head. But pinning down
| specific stories you can eliminate many of them.
| spoiler wrote:
| I would recommend therapy. It's helped me loads. Meditation
| can also help (but if you suspect you had a traumatic
| childhood, discuss meditation first with your therapist).
|
| The reason I suggest therapy is because it can be a number of
| reasons for the underlying anxiety. I think it's mostly a
| symptom of something else, rather than a standalone issue.
| cloogshicer wrote:
| Thanks for the suggestion!
| solarmist wrote:
| Therapy is great, but it can be very slow to get started
| because there can be a long ramp up process.
|
| There are many techniques that don't require a
| counselor/therapist. I highly recommend the youtube channel
| healthygamer_gg. There's a great community and many
| suggestions for well understood steps you can take on your
| own.
|
| Also, realizing you're not he only one feeling this way can
| help a TON!
| halkony wrote:
| I've participated in the group coaching program offered
| by healthygamer.gg (I like what they do) and I'd like to
| share my POV:
|
| For people with deep seated emotional/behavioral
| problems, I would strongly recommend against it. The
| coaches in the program aren't trained to be therapists,
| they're only there to facilitate discussions and prevent
| subgrouping. The kind of work involved with trauma and
| neglect is much better handled by a licensed therapist.
| Can't speak to individual coaching, but I imagine it's
| similar based on what I've asked about the coach's
| training. The only upside to the group coaching is it's
| cheap at $30 for a 90min session each week.
|
| After fixing a lot of problems in my life, I joined the
| program expecting to talk to other people that are 90% of
| the way to getting their shit together but most of the
| people in group had much deeper, unresolved dysfunctions
| that __really__ brought me down. By all means, reach out
| and seek companionship in hard times, but individual
| therapy yields much stronger results.
| solarmist wrote:
| Yeah, I would say I was worried about that too. I haven't
| participated, but that was my sense too. Group coaching
| is valuable, but it needs to be the right group with
| everyone working on the same things. So screening is
| super important here.
|
| That said his videos are excellent. He really knows his
| stuff and can help people start down the path improvement
| or to resolve simpler issues, but for deep seated issues
| individual therapy, not coaching, is probably a better
| choice.
|
| Yeah, my impression is Dr. K is trying to get a lot of
| mal-adjusted people to start down he road to being
| emotionally healthy, but there's such a pent-up need for
| this it's going to be a shitshow for a long time. So
| there's going to be a lot of toxicity coming out in those
| group session and if you're beyond the very beginning of
| your journey avoid them.
| hinkley wrote:
| I used to worry about everything, now I mostly worry about
| stuff that has actually blown up in the last and people still
| prefer pain to preparedness.
|
| I do see the Illusion of Control aspect in myself and others,
| and it's weird being on the other side of that now and trying
| to explain to people that what they want isn't what they need
| and also that we can put as much effort in as we like or we can
| just plan to do it twice and get on with it.
|
| The latter is a problem magnified by management, who don't want
| to pay for anything twice and will apply huge social pressure
| in service of the sunk cost fallacy.
| redblacktree wrote:
| Here's a pithy little saying for you on the topic: "Worry is
| interest paid in advance on a debt you may never owe."
| thih9 wrote:
| So, insurance?
|
| What I want to say is that there is time and place for
| worrying. And sure, worrying about everything is counter
| productive.
| solarmist wrote:
| That's a clever way of thinking about it. I like that.
| Sometimes insurance is invaluable and sometimes it is
| worthless.
|
| But when it's the default you get the American medical
| system.
| dakial1 wrote:
| You should read about stoicism and the Dichotomy of control. I
| was pretty much very rational on things that I worry about,
| mainly asking myself "is this something I can do something
| about?" If not, I wouldn't worry about it anymore. After some
| years I learned how aligned I was to stoicism.
| solarmist wrote:
| You're comment threw me. I thought I was following, but
| discussions on the future of technology/whatever don't come
| with yes/no questions.
|
| Can you give an example? Like "do you want to go ice skating
| Saturday?" also doesn't seem to fit your comment.
| bmn__ wrote:
| * Just be kind to women
|
| * If you like a girl, tell her she's pretty
|
| * Buy a girl some flowers and watch her appreciate it
|
| * Just make her laugh, women love a guy with a sense of humour
|
| * Just let her know how you really feel if you like her
|
| * Just hold the door open for her
|
| * Just ask her out, the worst she can say is no
|
| * Just find a girl that likes you for you
|
| * Just listen to her and show her you care
|
| * Just be a gentleman and pay her compliments
|
| * Just be yourself!
|
| * Just stop trying and the girl of your dreams will come into
| your life when you least expect it.
| the_only_law wrote:
| > Just make her laugh, women love a guy with a sense of humour
|
| Tbh Im done being funny. People take me significantly less
| seriously and I just become a sort of "court jester" for
| whoever I'm hanging out with.
| deeteecee wrote:
| not wrong/right but I was watching a video where monkeys were
| eating bananas. And then I tried it and now I've stuck to it.
| I've always had issues opening bananas so for me, that's the
| right way.
| swframe2 wrote:
| So many haha ...
|
| 1) Working for someone else instead of starting my own company.
|
| 2) Trusting people to do right thing instead of accepting that
| people are selfish.
|
| 3) Giving up on interesting tech projects because my friends
| didn't understand its value.
|
| 4) Write a lot of code before testing it haha
|
| 5) Avoiding tech bubbles instead of figuring out how to get in
| and out quickly.
|
| 6) Not keeping close contact with my tech friends (many of whom
| are super successful now).
| thenerdhead wrote:
| Just about everything. Not a single thing I do is the right way.
| It is a way.
| drewm1980 wrote:
| Consuming animal products.
| adastra22 wrote:
| I apparently hold chopsticks incorrectly. I am a white guy so
| it's not like this is my culture--I just started holding them the
| way I do as a kid in sushi restaurants and no one ever corrected
| me. I found out when I married my wife, who is from Taiwan.
|
| Here's the kicker though: I'm more dexterous with chopsticks than
| even she is. I can pick and place a single grain of rice, or hold
| the most slippery noodles with ease. So she just laughed about it
| and told me to keep doing whatever the heck I do.
| rjh29 wrote:
| Even in countries like Japan it is not especially rare for
| people to hold them that way. It's wrong but like you say, you
| can be just as good as anyone else with a bit of practice.
| scythe wrote:
| Do you hold the moving one like a pencil and let the other one
| rest on your ring finger? I had always done this and was
| eventually told that you're really supposed to use only three
| fingers. But after trying it that way for a while, I found it
| limited my dexterity quite a bit, and went back to the pencil
| method.
|
| Surprisingly, I did it in China for a month-long work trip and
| nobody batted an eye.
| hangonhn wrote:
| My family is ethnic Chinese and I grew up using chopsticks. I
| hold it using the pencil hold and no one has ever corrected
| me. It works well like 98% of the time. I may not be able to
| delicately pick up a tiny grain of rice or an entire salt
| shaker like my uncle who was demonstrating the proper hold
| but honestly those are such edge cases. The pencil hold is
| just way more natural and easier adoption may outweigh the
| benefit of handling some edge cases.
| tsukikage wrote:
| Turns out different people were taught to hold pencils very
| differently. I use two fingers to hold the moving one, which
| is also how I was taught to hold a pencil, and let the the
| other one rest on my middle finger. I've met people who use
| four fingers to hold a pencil and find the instructions
| incomprehensible.
| adastra22 wrote:
| Yup! So much easier than the "right" way of doing it.
| dirtybirdnj wrote:
| It doesn't matter if you do nice things for other people. Do it
| because you enjoy helping others, not because you want a
| response.
|
| You are acting incredibly selfishly if you help people because
| you feel it entitles you to a specific outcome.
|
| I now see why people have called me childish. You have to let
| people have their own agency and decide whether they want your
| help or even like what your doing. You can't get upset if they
| don't think it's as good as you do.
|
| Find people who care and lean into those. Forget the rest. Don't
| get emotionally attached to people who don't care about you. You
| can never "nice" them into liking you. Fake friendships are
| everywhere and you may seem "rude" by realizing this or pointing
| it out... but you can both live better lives by not continuing
| the charade.
| gtf21 wrote:
| Putting a teaspoon handle-down into a bottle of champagne when
| putting it in the fridge in order to "retain the fizziness" which
| I did unquestionably as something we just "did", until I had to
| tell someone else to do it a few months ago and realised that
| there was no reason this should work and, lo and behold, it makes
| no difference whatsoever.
| Pr0ject217 wrote:
| This works for pop/soda. I'm not entirely sure why, but if you
| pour a glass of coke/pepsi/whatever, and put a steel spoon or
| fork in the glass, and put it in the fridge, it won't go flat
| (nearly as quick).
| tiagod wrote:
| I imagine that could actually make it worse, as it would
| provide more nucleation sites for the bubbles to form.
| maverwa wrote:
| I dont think the spoon handle is actually supposed to touch
| the liquid. That would be hard to achive in a classic bottle
| of champagne, even if its full, I guess. Teaspoon handles are
| not that long.
| themandalorian wrote:
| I always overengineer and min/max things. Simple and some
| progress is better than none.
|
| No, grandma doesn't need a fibre connection with a NAS server
| with plex, using usenet, when she just wants the basic gardening
| channels :D
| makach wrote:
| It was when I was younger, I was independent and living alone
| that I realized that I had the power to change myself. In order
| to succeed there was only one person responsible for my happiness
| and good fortune, myself. I had to stop waiting for good things
| to happen, and make sure that I took faith in my own hands.
|
| This has led me to change employment, often, but not that often.
| It has made me approach many challenges from multiple angles.
|
| Maybe it didn't made me rich (so far) but I feel much wiser and I
| observe people on the other side, they are stuck in their beliefs
| and loyalty. So many clever people, smarter than me, but lost to
| ideas, opportunities and self- improvement.
| RGamma wrote:
| Ech.. the "everything's your fault" view is typically American,
| but it's also pretty unbalanced. Sure you have to do things,
| yet interdependence exists. Also there's plenty situations
| where shit's stacked against you by heritage/law/social order
| quite unnecessarily.
| CadmiumYellow wrote:
| It's not that "everything's your fault" though. It's that
| improving your life is your own responsibility, regardless of
| whose fault your circumstances are, because nobody else cares
| as much about your life as you do. It's not a statement about
| avoiding interdependence, it's about the fact that sitting
| around waiting for circumstances to change or for someone
| else to help you is not a practical way to improve your life
| because most of the time nothing will happen. I think of this
| is a variation on the serenity prayer, which is the single
| best piece of advice in the English language in my opinion:
| {insert higher power here} grant me the serenity to accept
| the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things
| I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. AA is full of
| cliches because they're true.
| beznet wrote:
| I like to remind myself that the society that we live in is/was
| created by people generally no smarter than you or I. People
| accept things as if a higher power is imposing their will
| against them to fit into these mental and physical constraints
| but once you start questioning the status quo, it feels very
| freeing.
| high_byte wrote:
| I had a similar experience. I was independent fairly young,
| lack of experience is expected but without well-defined goals
| and mentorship I didn't leverage it to the fully. tip for
| others in similar situations: being independent doesn't mean
| you go alone.
| seneca wrote:
| > In order to succeed there was only one person responsible for
| my happiness and good fortune, myself. I had to stop waiting
| for good things to happen, and make sure that I took faith in
| my own hands.
|
| This is the best response here. Too many people are stuck in a
| self defeating mindset of expecting life to happen to them, and
| blaming others when it doesn't, rather than taking charge for
| themselves.
| mmaunder wrote:
| Not my whole life but stuff I've discovered:
|
| Realizing that sitting for 8 to 12 hours per day coding is
| catastrophic for my health.
|
| Understanding the incredibly high and hidden cost of conflict and
| anger. Films romanticize fighting the good fight. Avoiding a
| fight (legal, arguments, etc) until you absolutely can't is worth
| a lot.
|
| Creativity and intellectual progress happen in a quiet relaxed
| and happy environment.
|
| Leadership starts with humility.
|
| Big companies signal unassailable leads and competence but tend
| to be wildly dysfunctional which makes them vulnerable.
|
| Yoga fixes lifelong back pain that drugs, swimming obsessively,
| chiropractors and workouts could not fix.
|
| Confronting death isn't that scary, even for an atheist.
|
| We don't deserve dogs.
|
| Everyone is the main character in their story, including you.
|
| You can be good at just about anything you love doing but can't
| be good at many things.
|
| You can't buy time but managing your time obsessively has its own
| cost.
|
| Early mornings are a very special time because no one else is up
| and it is the quietest and most productive part of the day.
| hyperjeff wrote:
| > Early mornings are a very special time because no one else is
| up and it is the quietest and most productive part of the day.
|
| For the exact same reason, so also are very late nights (~1 to
| 5am).
| scotty79 wrote:
| > Understanding the incredibly high and hidden cost of conflict
| and anger. Films romanticize fighting the good fight. Avoiding
| a fight (legal, arguments, etc) until you absolutely can't is
| worth a lot.
|
| That resonates strongly with me. It's better to just take the
| loss because entering a conflict because of it will cost more,
| even if you win, in almost all cases.
| austinsharp wrote:
| Another way it's been said:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_the_other_cheek
| scotty79 wrote:
| Bad idea. It's better to turn your ass to your adversary
| and move away from the conflict.
| roughly wrote:
| > We don't deserve dogs.
|
| I used to look at dogs and think that if any other sentient
| species came by, the things we'd done to an apex predator would
| be sufficient to mark our species for quarantine at best, but I
| was playing with a friend's dog the other day and it occurred
| to me that we've aggressively selected for the happiest, most
| loyal, friendliest critters we can find - that's what we want,
| that's what we want to be around*. The world's complicated and
| our actions in it don't always reflect us at our best, but
| there's something redemptive about our choice in companions.
|
| (*Yes, some dogs are bred to be dicks, and some people are
| dicks, but most dogs are good dogs, and most people are, too.)
| WA wrote:
| There are too many dogs.
|
| In some countries, dog owners don't give a shit and let their
| dogs poop everywhere (France for example).
|
| Many dog owners can't handle their dogs.
|
| Dogs are scary for some people, especially children. Most dog
| owners don't understand this and say "it's a good dog, he
| doesn't do anything" instead of doing the only sane thing:
| "you're scared? I take the dog away".
|
| It only takes one dick owner with a dick dog to instill fear
| in people (children) with significant and long-lasting
| consequences for their lives.
|
| So yeah, some dogs are cute and whatnot, but unless you have
| a remote ranch or a huge property, and dogs can be dogs
| there, we actually need less dogs.
| HEmanZ wrote:
| "Dogs are cute and whatnot"...
|
| I suspect from your comment you have not had a good dog in
| your life before. I'm sorry for you for that.
|
| Dogs, when raised well and taken care of, have incredible
| emotional intelligence and can communicate extremely well
| with humans. This combination can make them real friends
| and companions, not just cute animals. When people say,
| "man's best friend" they really mean it.
| NateEag wrote:
| Or, perhaps, OP has had good dogs in his life and
| recognizes the negative externalities many dog owners
| push onto the rest of us.
|
| I'm still annoyed at whoever let their dog crap in my
| yard and didn't clean it up. I stepped in it while doing
| yard work, didn't discover it until the next day, then
| spent two hours and multiple runs through the washer
| cleaning the darned shoes to a usable state.
|
| Clean up after your dog.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| Let's not pretend people being jerks is a unique
| phenomenon to dog owners
| roughly wrote:
| was this meant as a response to me or just a discourse on
| dogs?
| theandrewbailey wrote:
| > In some countries, dog owners don't give a shit and let
| their dogs poop everywhere (France for example).
|
| I grew up in the American rust belt, and when taking family
| walks around the neighborhood, my parents were eternally
| yelling at me to not step in that broken glass, or that dog
| poop.
| renjimen wrote:
| I've found that it's okay to sit for 8+ hours most days so long
| as I'm getting out of my seat every hour and going for a short
| walk or two every day. Yoga, even a 15 minute session once a
| week, helps a lot, as you say. Using a vertical mouse, large
| text and staring out the window frequently are the other
| healthy habits I stick to while working.
| lpapez wrote:
| I haven't tried yoga yet because I luckily realized other items
| before I needed yoga :) Agreed fully
| ce4 wrote:
| Binding your shoe laces wrong with an easily loosening granny
| knot instead of a proper square knot.
|
| Not answering strictly according to "you've done your whole
| life", but I see this often when deliberately looking at other's
| shoe laces. I just recently tried to correct someone's 40yr old
| habit :)
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granny_knot
| [deleted]
| intrasight wrote:
| I only do that on some shoes that just won't stay tied with a
| "regular" knot.
| tetraca wrote:
| I've been using this one ever since a discovered it, like ten
| years ago: https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/secureknot.htm
| whoomp12342 wrote:
| tabs, not spaces.
| high_byte wrote:
| you mean you were wrong to use tabs your whole life instead of
| space? ;)
| mhandley wrote:
| Tying my shoelaces:
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/grannyknot.htm
|
| I was doing what Ian calls the "Un-balanced Shoelace Knot".
| Reversing the starting knot makes all the difference.
| intrasight wrote:
| I tried switching when that first showed up on HN a couple
| years ago. Tried it for a few days but the habit didn't stick.
| I should try again.
| cvhashim04 wrote:
| What's with the proliferation of Ask HN post? Take this back to
| Reddit.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| It took me up until this year to learn I tie my shoes wrong.
|
| The knot has to be balanced. I never knew.
| geocrasher wrote:
| Food is not a reward. Food is not for recreation. Food is not for
| fun.
|
| Food is fuel.
|
| Food _should_ be delicious and enjoyable. Your enjoyment can come
| from taste, not from quantity. Being hungry is a good sign, not a
| problem. And "Just full enough" is more than full enough.
|
| I have a long way to go, but at 46 years old, this is all a
| revelation to me.
| thegabez wrote:
| Using toilet paper...bidets are easier and more hygienic.
| [deleted]
| throwawaysalome wrote:
| Monopoly. If the player elects not to buy the property he lands
| on, it gets auctioned to the other players. This oft unfollowed
| rule makes the game 100x more fun when followed.
| LanceH wrote:
| That and free parking doesn't pay anything. Number of
| houses/hotels is also limited to the number that came with the
| game.
|
| Play by the rules and the game will actually come to an end.
| [deleted]
| bokchoi wrote:
| NPR recently aired a story on the history of monopoly which was
| fascinating!
|
| https://www.npr.org/2023/01/25/1151367036/story-monopoly-ame...
| interestica wrote:
| And well the McMillions scandal is something:
| https://www.vulture.com/2020/02/mcdonalds-monopoly-game-
| frau...
| SimonPStevens wrote:
| On the subject of monopoly, it's also interesting that it's
| roots are in a game created to teach the negative aspects of
| monopolies. The original game that modern monopoly is based on
| had two sets of rules, one that rewarded all players for wealth
| creation, and a second with the goal of creating a monopoly to
| crush opponents.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_(game)
| thundergolfer wrote:
| I think the is a nice specific case of the general problem
| with mixing education and entertainment. Many have addressed
| this, but I like Postman's ideas the most. If you give
| children educational television programs, you're not teaching
| them to love learning, you're teaching them to love
| television.
|
| The Lindy-effect blessed methods are still just pen, paper,
| books, discussion, and debate.
| peeters wrote:
| Not following this rule is also almost singularly responsible
| for Monopoly's reputation as an extremely long game.
| xahrepap wrote:
| And the person who originally chose to not buy it can bid on
| it. Potentially buying it for less than list price!
| ac50hz wrote:
| My psychology friends are going to be busy for months (or years)
| with the responses here...
| marsven_422 wrote:
| [dead]
| rjmill wrote:
| When my then-gf/now-wife and I first moved in together, I got
| really mad at her because she kept "hiding" my stuff when I left
| it out for more than a day. I couldn't find anything!
|
| At some point, I yelled, "It's like you don't even want to see
| any of my things when I'm not using them!" Then I stopped for a
| second. For the first time in my life, it made sense.
|
| The whole point of putting things away is to hide them! No one
| wants to look at your crap when you're not using it.
| dayvid wrote:
| I literally bought a lockbox for this reason, because she would
| things to a different place every time.
|
| She freaked out when I told her, but it came with two keys and
| I gave her one so she doesn't think I'm hiding anything from
| her.
| DontchaKnowit wrote:
| This is so absolutely hilarious to me because this is 100%
| something I'd do. I had a friend come over once and then he
| came over again a week later and all of my kitchen cabinet
| doors were open and in the exact same position as they had been
| a week prior. He was like "dude did you not shut your cabinet
| doors? Wtf"
|
| Its just not even on my radar
| paxys wrote:
| Open cabinets are in vogue now. Keep the doors open and
| you're weird. Remove them altogether and you're stylish.
| kuhewa wrote:
| An illuminating experience for me was a housemate and a
| fairly sharp one at that who wondered if we would get visited
| by ghosts at night because cabinet doors were always open in
| the kitchen in the morning. It didn't occur to her that the
| extremely more likely scenario was that I would scavenge
| around after she went to sleep and never shut doors.
| dwighttk wrote:
| I hate cabinet doors... only time I think of them one just
| almost punctured my skull
| robofanatic wrote:
| on a similar note. about a decade ago, I was sharing
| apartment with a good friend. It was 2 bed/1.5 bath
| apartment. He had a bad habit of leaving the shower-tub knob
| on 'shower' after he's done. I was a late person so usually
| ended up showering last. My bad habit was that I didn't pay
| attention to the knob before starting the shower. For first
| week every single day I got a blast of freezing water on my
| face, until one day I confronted him! obviously that didn't
| work. So one day I woke up early and did the same thing to
| him. From that day our habits changed. I always check the
| shower knob before turning it on.
| johnmaguire wrote:
| Huh - I never would've thought to turn the knob back to
| tub. Why were you being blasted in the face by cold water?
| Do you get in the shower before turning it on?
|
| Perhaps this is a regional thing... living in Michigan I've
| always let the water warm up first (perhaps drought is a
| concern where you live?)
|
| Also, most showers I've used automatically switch back to
| tub mode once the water shuts off. Maybe he's used to that
| style!
| robofanatic wrote:
| we had a manual switch at that time. I was new to the new
| england area and I grew up in a tropical country :-) so
| never had a habit to check before starting the shower.
| CadmiumYellow wrote:
| Ah so this is one of those things where neither of you
| were really right or wrong. If you'd grown up in New
| England you'd have known that the "right" behavior was to
| turn the shower on and warm it up before you got in.
| Having grown up there myself I have to say it would never
| occur to me to turn a shower on while standing in it and
| I'd assume nobody else would either because it's
| guaranteed to be painful, even in summer and even when
| it's just water coming out of the tub faucet onto your
| feet. My family always left ours on shower mode and never
| had an issue for this exact reason. Always so interesting
| to learn about the little things people from other places
| do differently!
| robofanatic wrote:
| I think back then I used to get in the shower, turn on
| the tub faucet, and when it was warm enough, switch. to
| be honest I still do that sometimes by mistake :-)
| psychomugs wrote:
| I had a roommate who did this every time they went to the
| kitchen, like a cupboard- and cabinet-opening spectre.
| ryanianian wrote:
| I do this. Unless the organization system is super well-
| mapped in my brain, I don't trust that I know where things
| are. Opening all the cupboards makes me feel like I can
| actually approach the problem of finding the toolkit I need
| to perform a task. Hyper-organized kitchens have the
| toolkits pre-assembled in bins placed in cupboards. That's
| hard to do.
|
| (Perhaps related: a `util` class is basically a junk drawer
| in a kitchen. Some kitchens are basically just giant junk
| drawers. Good luck finding anything, but hey putting things
| away is super easy - just put it wherever it fits!)
| musingsole wrote:
| I used to take the cabinet doors off all my rentals --
| less for me keeping track of what was where and more for
| guests so they didn't need to ask where anything was.
| dbalatero wrote:
| Yeah, this feels like the best solution if you prefer
| open cabinets for whatever reason. Leaving the doors on
| and open is just laying booby traps for the next person
| that wanders in.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| Don't you ever bash your head into the corner of an open
| cabinet?
| throwawaymaths wrote:
| Sharpie + labels.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| The solution is to not have any doors.
| linsomniac wrote:
| Open cabinet doors drive me crazy because they look like a
| concussion waiting to happen.
| kalensh wrote:
| This is a minor point of annoyance between me and my
| husband, I think because of our height difference. He likes
| to open ALL the cabinets when putting away dishes, and
| sometimes leaves them open. I, with eye level much closer
| to the bottom edge of the doors, walk in and see all these
| corners waiting for me to run into them. When I put away
| dishes, I open a cabinet, put away everything that belongs
| there, close it and move along to the next one.
|
| But I also think it's a difference in how we were raised,
| because he does not push his chair in after leaving a table
| either..........
| rjmill wrote:
| Can confirm. Have bonked my head on cabinets multiple
| times. The danger is primarily in bending-over-then-
| standing motions.
|
| Life hack: if you keep all your bottom cabinets open, you
| don't have to bend over to see what's inside :^)
| yojo wrote:
| At that point, why not just take the doors off?
|
| Open shelving is a thing. No one said your cabinets need
| to have doors.
| jxramos wrote:
| Yah, they do have utility though, they guard the contents
| from a higher degree of exposure to dust and kitchen
| exhaust grime and any splatter that should occur in the
| space that goes in all directions. Easier to wipe a more
| or less flat planar surface than the intricate surfaces
| possibly pervious surfaces of the contents.
| yojo wrote:
| Oh, I agree. My cabinets have doors, and I keep them
| closed. But if you're already leaving all your cabinets
| open at all times, you might as well just get the doors
| out of your way.
| wintogreen74 wrote:
| if you have pets you sure do!
| Waterluvian wrote:
| There is a spectrum everyone is on, where at one end is
| emotional distress at cabinets being ajar, and the other
| end is ignoring a smoke alarm chirping every 43 seconds
| for six months. Somewhere on that spectrum is, "I don't
| care for the doors but I don't want to be bothered to
| remove them."
| DontchaKnowit wrote:
| This is so funny. That same friend of mine came over a
| few months prior and was like "HOLY SHIT how do you live
| with that noise its driving me crazy"
|
| I'd been living here for like 5 months at that point and
| had completely blocked out the noise of a dead fire alarm
| in my basement.
| switchbak wrote:
| I think there's a metaphor for putting up with crappy
| code in there somewhere.
| Teever wrote:
| that takes even more planning snd effort than just
| closing them
| phyzome wrote:
| Then you have to dust more stuff!
| klyrs wrote:
| Worse than dust, kitchens are regularly filled with
| clouds (however thin) of cooking oil. I had an apartment
| once where the landlord was apparently too cheap for
| cupboard doors or a proper exhaust fan, and infrequently-
| used dishes got _nasty_.
| phyzome wrote:
| Ughh yeah, you'd end up with a gross semi-polymerized
| sticky film on stuff.
| pavon wrote:
| We had some tall cabinet doors that we were particularly
| prone to hitting our heads on, so we replaced them with
| curtains. Did the same for some closets with sliding
| doors when I got annoyed with only being able to access
| half the closet at once. The curtains hide the clutter,
| and IMO look nicer than the doors did.
| rjmill wrote:
| Exactly! You don't even see the mess.
|
| It's funny you mention the cabinets. My wife and I can tell
| whenever my siblings have been over: they're all incorrigible
| cabinet goblins.
|
| I still leave cabinets open, but it's typically because I'm
| using it as a reminder to return whatever I had taken from
| the cabinet. Of course, my Cabinet Sight still has a ways to
| go, so the thing doesn't get returned until I actually notice
| the open cabinet the next day.
| j45 wrote:
| I know it's not for everyone.. this is solvable by putting
| your cabinets on a soft closing track installed at a slight
| angle to help cabinets easily close on its own. Cabinet doors
| also have some tweaks that can be done. I get it's a for a
| habit but if anyone has a problem with remembering it's
| sometimes easier to let the natural motion of the door build
| some muscle memory.
|
| My better half has very few things that catch my attention in
| a less than positive way, one is not turning off the lights.
| It's like a museum tour to learn what has been visited that
| day.
|
| They have had the lights turned off for them their whole life
| despite being super independent otherwise. So I just used it
| as an excuse to install some Caseta wifi light switches and
| suddenly the lights were turned off before bed because it was
| remembered but too much work to do once in bed. But because
| the Apple Watch had an extension app it was easy enough to
| do. It doesn't mean everything should be automated but it was
| one that kept a small thing into a fun and easy going solve.
| It made it easier to consider motorized blinds due.
| tmm wrote:
| The number of people on this thread who leave cabinets open
| (and apparently come families of cabinet-door-openers) is
| astounding to me. Do you all leave toilet seats up too? What
| about the refrigerator? Car doors? Dresser drawers? Do you
| not push your chair in when you get up from the table? Do you
| at least return shopping carts?
|
| I am not an organized person, I see a horizontal surface and
| I put stuff on it. But leaving doors open? I don't think I
| even take my hand off the cabinet door when I open it. One
| hand for the door, one for the thing I'm getting.
|
| The only door I leave open is the washing machine, so it can
| dry out. It gets closed the next time I'm in the laundry room
| though.
| isleyaardvark wrote:
| And do these people not dust?
| [deleted]
| mehphp wrote:
| One of those is not like the others. I see no issue leaving
| a toilet seat up.
|
| It's just as easy for the next person to put it down as it
| was for me to put it up.
| tmm wrote:
| It's not for the next person. It's to keep the stuff in
| the toilet, in the toilet, rather than as an aerosolized
| spray that gets spread about.[1][2]
|
| I guess it doesn't really matter if your toilet is in its
| own room, but at least most houses in the US have the
| toilet next to the sink (where your toothbrush is).
|
| Put the seat down before you flush, because it's more
| sanitary.
|
| [1] https://microbiologysociety.org/news/society-
| news/does-putti...
|
| [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4692156/
| mkl wrote:
| You're talking about the lid, not the seat. Also, some of
| that aerosolised spray stays airborne under the lid and
| is released when you open it [1].
|
| [1] I think Mary Roach talked about this in this
| interview by Adam Savage, but don't remember exactly:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfZ9RrxQ5NM
| [deleted]
| teepo wrote:
| I cringe when watching actors on television make an
| entrance but don't close the door.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| Toilet seats don't belong in that list l.
| clint wrote:
| Everything having a home is good, but I like to still be able
| to "see" things when they are put away. For example, throwing
| things into a drawer where other things can obscure other
| things is bad, because I will forget the things that are on the
| bottom. I make sure all my socks are visible in my sock drawer
| by using an organizer that allows my rolled up socks to be
| stored vertically and I can't put other stuff on top of them.
|
| Cabinets without doors, and shelves without doors are critical
| too. I'm not sure why but if I do not have regular visible
| sight of things, they may as well not exist and I will quickly
| forget that they are there, leading to all kinds of chaos.
| ChildOfChaos wrote:
| Oh this is me, I very much want anything that I don't need to
| see right now to be out of the way, which is why I hate the
| modern world, even UI interfaces and constant notification etc,
| everything that is not relevent right now, I want to hand for
| the times when i do want it, but also out of the way when i am
| doing something else.
| ilyt wrote:
| Well, it is "looks neat" vs "there is space that is free, why
| not use it for stuff that you use often?"
|
| Some people have mental disease that makes them annoyed where
| the flat surfaces are covered with immediately useful and
| easily accessible stuff and act up. "Oh look at those flat
| surfaces that don't get used for anything useful 99% of the
| time, how neat and tidy"
|
| Some other kind of people have different disease of just leavin
| shit lying around for months and never use it, where it should
| be put back in storage (or bin) weeks ago already. "Don't touch
| my stuff, if you move it I won't remember where it is!" (then
| promptly forgets and wastes time searching thru clutter anyway.
|
| Sane compromise is somewhere in the middle. Don't constantly
| hide the favourite knife every fucking day, ain't nobody got
| time for that shit. But probably clean it so the next time you
| use it you won't waste time on that. Cutting board can stay
| out, you use it every day, multiple times anyway.
| GoToRO wrote:
| One way this was said by one lady in a tv show was to not use
| your home as storage. By home she meant hallways, on top of
| furniture and so on. It makes your home look more like a
| storage unit and less like a house.
|
| It helped me to start putting things away in drawers and so on,
| but also to think about how often I use them, or if I still
| need them.
|
| The tv show was about "proffesional organizers".
| ilyt wrote:
| > on top of furniture and so on
|
| Pfff, fancy posh TV lady with her ACTUAL DEDICATED STORAGE
| SPACE in SPACIOUS HOME.
| scotty79 wrote:
| Living is what you do between kitchen, bed, desk and bath and
| front door. The rest is literally the storage unit.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| IIRC there were some studies on where people in the US
| spend their waking hours at home and, at the time, for most
| people, it was overwhelmingly the bathroom and the
| kitchen/dining-area. The dining area especially was where
| everyone did their bills and homework and such, and where
| mail got left when it came in from the mailbox. I think a
| bad misreading of those results was why builders wasted
| kitchen space on built-in desks for a bunch of years,
| before everyone realized how dumb that was and knocked it
| off.
|
| (this wasn't factoring in WFH, of course--I think most of
| the important original work was done in like the 70s)
| thatfrenchguy wrote:
| << Life at Home in the 21st Century >> is a good read on
| the subject
| bradwood wrote:
| I still have this now. She's always hiding my shit from me.
| Deliberately to piss me off. /s
| titzer wrote:
| Every item should have an agreed-upon place where it goes.
| Then if it is not out/can't find it, it's in its place. So if
| you both agree on that, then putting things away is NBD, and
| no one is hiding anything.
| garrickvanburen wrote:
| The phrase in my household, "put it where you expect it to
| be"
| brookst wrote:
| This works great except when you don't agree on where you
| expect it to be.
|
| We have an ongoing battle about where whisks live: with
| the blender and beaters, or with the cooking spoons and
| ladle.
|
| Our rule is "whoever empties the dishwasher gets to put
| things where they think they belong".
| roarcher wrote:
| This presents a chicken-and-egg problem. I expect all my
| shit to be randomly strewn about because that's where
| I've always put it.
| coreyhn wrote:
| I'm a stickler for this as well, but at the same time it is
| easy to have the status quo and get used to not putting things
| away.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| My wife and I have a rule, "everything needs to have a home."
| Because if it doesn't have a home, it becomes clutter, and
| after enough clutter, it finds a home... usually a sub-optimal
| one, like a junk drawer.
|
| The kids (4 and 5) have adapted to this wonderfully. It really
| helps them. It makes cleanup a trivial task because everything
| is known to belong somewhere specific.
|
| Related to this: the recognition that everything is harder in a
| messy home. If you have stuff everywhere, you are paying a
| small tax any time you want to find or do something. Even
| cluttering your cupboards and drawers means you're tediously
| sifting through too much stuff or constantly worried about
| knocking something over while getting something else out. It's
| been especially good to avoid the dance of removing items to
| get the items underneath, then putting them back.
|
| Finally: the lesson that when you keep stuff, you are paying a
| "tax" on keeping it. Throw away stuff you don't think you'll
| ever need again. It's cheaper to re-buy 1 or 2 things than to
| keep 100 of them for years and years. That storage space could
| be better used.
|
| Bonus: If everything has a home, and you run out of homes, you
| quickly recognize that you have too much stuff and it might be
| time to make trade-offs. This puts an upper bound on the amount
| of stuff in our home.
|
| Note that this could all easily sound super hardcore but it's
| not. It's just a general guide we have. We aren't forcing our
| kids to throw excess toys away and we're not writing a book
| about it. A flexible tool to guide behaviour, not enforce it.
| gofreddygo wrote:
| > ... you run out of homes, ... you have too much stuff ...
| puts an upper bound on the amount of stuff in our home.
|
| Conversation from last weekend -
|
| "I want those brown shoes. They're so nice and fit like
| they're made for me"
|
| "You're shoes are overflowing your side, into mine and now
| into the corridor. I think you have too many."
|
| "I don't have any that are like boots. I want brown ones for
| the city.I'll wear to my $event"
|
| "You got yellow ones last month. They look like boots"
|
| "They're for a hike. These are for the city. I don't like
| being told about my shoes."
|
| And then there were more shoes.
|
| Same night -
|
| "I need to donate my old clothes"
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| Some women care about shoes far, far more than makes sense
| to their husbands / boyfriends.
|
| My several attempts to understand this have been fruitless.
|
| This might belong on the short list of things to work
| around, rather than work through.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| I think it's one of these personality traits you accept,
| even if you don't understand it.
| Terretta wrote:
| In women's wear, shoes are not foot wear. They're an
| accessory.
|
| It's nobody's fault shoes are bigger than earrings except
| the architect/builder who didn't accommodate that in the
| closet. :-)
| erisinger wrote:
| Huh. I wish I had encountered this way of thinking
| sooner.
| caeril wrote:
| > "They're for a hike. These are for the city"
|
| I'm a guy, and I do this, too. I have two identical pair of
| boots. One pair is for "clean" things, such as going to the
| store, the office, etc. The other pair is for "dirty"
| things, such as yardwork, hiking, gardening, woodworking,
| etc.
|
| As my "clean" boots age and wear, I swap them out for a new
| pair, and the previous "clean" boots become my new "dirty"
| boots. It's a cycle I've been running for decades now.
|
| The hike vs city distinction makes sense to me, regardless
| of gender.
| retrac wrote:
| In my 20s I had a roommate and we kept having arguments with
| use of space. I would interpret his leaving new purchases
| just wherever as laziness or not caring. I'd hand it to him,
| and tell him to put it away, and it'd be left somewhere else
| randomly.
|
| I eventually realised he bought things without thinking about
| where to put them, when he got home with it. So it just sort
| of would get abandoned wherever. There was no assigned "away"
| for him, and I was assuming there was. Baffling, but at least
| it wasn't passive-aggressive like I had thought. Some of my
| habits eventually wore off on him, thankfully.
|
| A related theme is: I don't have anywhere to put this even
| after thinking about it -- then you probably have too much
| stuff!
| bandyaboot wrote:
| > A related theme is: I don't have anywhere to put this
| even after thinking about it -- then you probably have too
| much stuff!
|
| I seldom run into the problem of not having anywhere to put
| something. On the other hand, I often run into the problem
| of being unsure of how best to categorize something so that
| I can decide where it should belong.
| docmars wrote:
| I too prefer to group related items together when I'm
| organizing drawers or storage compartments of any kind,
| and if an item has no similar items to live with, it ends
| up orphaned on a counter or surface somewhere, ultimately
| risking itself ending up in a junk drawer.
|
| But if it's an extra pair of glasses or something
| fragile, you don't want it getting tossed around other
| things like metal tools or otherwise damaging things.
|
| Other times, I leave things out of place in the open
| deliberately to remind myself to do something. This could
| be placing a bill or usually other paper items right at
| the end of the dinner table to force myself to remember
| taking care of it. Another example is leaving a cardboard
| box near the front door to recycle it later. It's
| intended to ugly up my space to bug me and take care of
| it.
|
| So, I often use my physical space as a natural to-do list
| of sorts. Works well!
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Yeah, I hd never even heard of this idea until probably my
| 30s.
|
| And it took much longer until I realized it's actually not
| silly.
|
| Now I try to live this way, with limited but increasing
| success.
| elecush wrote:
| >A related theme is: I don't have anywhere to put this even
| after thinking about it -- then you probably have too much
| stuff!
|
| or not enough clear surfaces x)
| peplee wrote:
| Had the same situation. I'd forever be asking, "what's your
| plan for this or that item that's just lying around clearly
| not put away?" because that's how I approach it. There
| wasn't a plan, it was all spontaneous, willy nilly. We made
| it work, but I've found it's far less draining to simply
| find a roommate, now it's a significant other, who operates
| similarly to me.
| shostack wrote:
| I've run into this. It's tough because the answer I might
| arrive at ("I don't have a place to store this, so I
| shouldn't buy it") is often not well received by people you
| live with as it comes across as you trying to dictate what
| they can and cannot buy.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| I agree with this 100% but I struggle with finding homes for
| everything. I feel like I need more furniture with drawers or
| cupboards. It's creating the storage space that I struggle
| with.
| cstrahan wrote:
| I have a TON of small components and tools, and maybe my
| system could be helpful:
|
| I keep several shelves full of stacking storage boxes in my
| garage. I've given each of these a unique number, written
| in permanent marker on the front face and lid of each. I
| chuck things mostly randomly in whatever box has some
| space, and then I track those newly added/removed items in
| a spreadsheet (more specifically, I just use a text file
| and treat the line numbers as the respective bin number --
| primitive, but works better for my workflow than something
| like Google Sheets).
|
| I've found that trying to keep an immense inventory
| "organized" is too daunting (what happens if I overflow one
| bin -- do I dedicate an entire bin to the one or two items
| that wouldn't fit, leaving this bin mostly empty? Ugh!),
| and the only real utility with keeping things categorically
| collocated is to retrieve/store items efficiently anyway --
| by introducing a layer of indirection, I get the end result
| I'm looking for with a fraction of the work.
| xen2xen1 wrote:
| My too, but the only thing that helped was making storage
| spaces for a type of thing, and when the space designated
| overflows, something has to be tossed.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| yeah, buying organizational furniture is helpful. Those
| metal shelves from ikea are great, stack plastic containers
| on them and it's not even too expensive to fill a closet
| like this
| Torwald wrote:
| I want to recommend the boxes system called "Pretty useful
| box" to you. For years now that stuff solved the problem
| again and again.
|
| https://reallyusefulproducts.co.uk/usa/
| criddell wrote:
| So you don't have a junk drawer? We have a junk drawer and it
| is the home for packing tape, scissors, flashlight,
| batteries, etc...
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Packing tape in the workshop. Scissors in the knife block.
| Paper scissors in the craft cupboard. Other scissors in the
| "office" (there's a fun battle between what are craft
| supplies and what are office supplies). Batteries in the
| battery/charger cupboard in my office (hugely popular for
| all the kids toys). Flashlights are in the workshop (big
| Ryobi ones), kids rooms (small toy flashlights that look
| like ladybugs), and in the cars.
|
| We DO have a "junk drawer" but it's really just a "assorted
| kitchen stuff" drawer. You'll find birthday candles,
| matches, elastics, twist ties, etc. but that's their home.
|
| Super fun semantics talk because we love semantics: maybe
| your junk drawer isn't a junk drawer? Maybe you know
| exactly what's there and why. Homes are of all different
| sizes and maybe that works perfectly because you don't need
| things like a battery cupboard.
| LeSaucy wrote:
| Packing tape goes in the adhesives drawer in the
| garage/shop.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| I hang them on a pegboard. My adhesives are woefully
| inadequate to deserve a drawer... gosh I wish...
| ZiiS wrote:
| I have three adhesive draws and they certainly don't have
| room for tape.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| What? That is the utilities draw! The junk draw is for the
| small white elephant statue recieved from a white elephant
| years ago, the plate from an old car that was totaled, and
| a stray n64 controller.
| switchbak wrote:
| The draw?
|
| I can't help but hear that in a northeastern accent like
| from the folks from This Old House :)
| [deleted]
| 1-more wrote:
| I had several such drawers. My fiancee hipped me to the
| label maker. Now a drawer that has some loose thematically
| linked bunch of crap in it instead has _exactly this list
| of things in it_ where that list is enumerated on the front
| of the drawer. For instance I had put safety pins,
| sharpies, a sewing kit, scissors and stain removal pens in
| a Sterilite drawer together. These were loosely
| thematically linked along the lines of "have to do with
| fabric." The drawer was maybe 1/3 full and I don't have a
| ton of space for more drawers. I put my many spare AA, AAA,
| CR2032 batteries in there because they'd really be wasting
| space in a drawer on their own. Suddenly the loose thematic
| link is severed! It's become a junk drawer!! But if you put
| a label on the front with everything I've written in this
| comment, it becomes the drawer that is home to exactly
| these items. You can put another item not on the list in
| it, you just need to add a label!
|
| This blew my mind wide open. Absolutely game changing. The
| space works for _us_ , not the other way around!!
| pkulak wrote:
| I just bought a used laptop on impulse last week, and it
| still has no home. It's driving me nuts. It's sitting next to
| me right now. And because it's pre-usb-c, the charger needs a
| home too. I have about 30 large bins in the garage for things
| without homes, and that may be its fate, unfortunately.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| I don't know your use-case, but a laptop's "home" at home
| would be your laptop bag - or - a docking-station on your
| desk - use your desktop PC, on a desk, while at home; while
| your laptop bag's hone would be on a coathook in your
| mudroom or closet - or a designated (and maintained) spot
| by the door.
| syntheweave wrote:
| Get a cafeteria tray and put the laptop on that. Homing
| items is mostly about dividing and binding space, and the
| tray acts to bundle any accessories or project parts, while
| also dividing it from the room.
| sublinear wrote:
| > Note that this could all easily sound super hardcore but
| it's not. It's just a general guide we have. We aren't
| forcing our kids to throw excess toys away and we're not
| writing a book about it. A flexible tool to guide behaviour,
| not enforce it.
|
| I was having a hard time thinking about what I'm doing wrong,
| but I think this is close enough. I'm so inspired to steal
| some variant of this disclaimer especially this part: "We
| aren't forcing x to do y and we're not writing a book about
| it."
| SpeedilyDamage wrote:
| Heh, reading this I can't help but think of how different the
| perception of what your kids are feeling is vs what they're
| actually feeling.
|
| "This is great for the kids!" Maybe! Or, equally plausibly
| it's annoying, but they don't tell you.
| gala8y wrote:
| Or worse:
|
| Even if they really liked it and adopted it, then they
| would not be able to cause chaos and destruction, to
| embrace disorder, noise, unpredictability of things (both
| physical and social/abstract). This would be to their
| disadvantage.
|
| Too much order, not allowing for chaos is _not_ good for
| kids. Ways of chaos and destruction should be welcome.
| Order should be welcome. Walking lightly between the two,
| while maintaining contact _and_ giving kids freedom is not
| an easy task, I think.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| The problem with online discussions is that people
| project their own perceptions onto what it all looks
| like. Their rooms are never clean. Having a home for
| everything helps, but whatever you're picturing... it's
| likely wrong. This house is a mess because it's lived in.
| gala8y wrote:
| I am not trying to picture your home in any negative way
| or suggest anything to you in any way. I read your whole
| comment, incl. last paragraph. What I was trying to say
| was more of a general comment on how delicate (and
| beneficial) is to have access to different kinds of
| energies, allowing order and disorder, and how going too
| much to either side can have long lasting, far reaching
| consequences. That going too far, even playfully, in one
| direction ("in this home _everything_ has its own place")
| sets contexts far more reaching than one could imagine.
|
| To add to this, I have a dedicated place for almost
| anything, as I code things rather spatially than
| visually, so I think it's great. I just think it is
| important to leave lots of freedom for kids. It's like
| difference between "I see you did not put all things away
| today" vs. "How are you doing in 'everything needs to
| have a home' department, today?"
|
| All the best!
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Yesterday we asked 4yo if he wanted this rack of plastic
| bins for toys in his room. He was so eager that he wanted
| to carry it himself. Once up there, he began dismantling
| his current system and excitedly placing toys into the new
| bins while singing to himself.
|
| The first thing that comes to mind is how to communicate
| this without people thinking, "oh those poor kids, they've
| been brainwashed into being neat freaks." I guess the
| answer comes in: 5yo is not like this and that's fine.
| Their rooms are usually a mess because they're kids. And
| our house is usually a disaster because we have kids and
| are tired. Just because everything has a home, doesn't mean
| we're perfect about it... far from it. The kitchen would
| usually horrify you.
|
| The kids genuinely love it because when they ask to get out
| the slime or do arts and crafts, and we say, "but first you
| have to clean up your other toys," that's a task they are
| 100% capable of doing themselves. It gives them agency.
| SpeedilyDamage wrote:
| > The kids genuinely love it because when they ask to get
| out the slime or do arts and crafts, and we say, "but
| first you have to clean up your other toys," that's a
| task they are 100% capable of doing themselves. It gives
| them agency.
|
| Haha, your world is going to be rocked in two decades,
| when your kid casually mentions something you thought
| they "loved" but really thought was stupid. It's almost
| like you've forgotten your own childhood!
| Waterluvian wrote:
| Parents are incapable of knowing what their kids like and
| dislike? I'm feeling a sorrowful empathy for where this
| line of reasoning might come from.
| SpeedilyDamage wrote:
| It's a well known problem[0][1] with accepting parental
| assertions around their child's health. That's why kids
| are often given time alone with their doctor, to express
| feelings they wouldn't otherwise feel comfortable about.
| Additionally, it's been shown that a parent is not great
| at objectively evaluating their child's emotional state
| or place in the world. [2]
|
| It's even got an entry in TVTropes![3]
|
| But why would you have a "sorrowful empathy" because I
| have a passing knowledge about childhood and children?
| You can't seriously think you're going to always know
| what your children are thinking or that they're even
| being entirely straightforward with you now, can you?
| Surely they have their own lives by now even a little
| bit, some space for their own that you're not involved in
| and don't know about.
|
| [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15473508/
|
| [1] https://archive.nytimes.com/parenting.blogs.nytimes.c
| om/2009...
|
| [2] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/201407/pa
| rents-j...
|
| [3] https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoesntKno
| wTheirO...
| PuppyTailWags wrote:
| I disagree with this with some caveats. I find that
| specific memory as a child (parents mistaking something
| you hate as something you enjoyed) to actually reflect
| the amount of open communication and mutual listening of
| parent/child. My parents rarely listened to me, so I went
| with learned helplessness, and my consent was mistaken as
| enjoyment. But I know of other families where preferences
| were listened to and became the bedrock of having a
| trusting relationship with parental units.
| lb1lf wrote:
| -If my kids are anything to go by, no worries: If it annoys
| them, they'll tell you. Repeatedly.
| flycaliguy wrote:
| We call this the OHIO system. Only Hold It Once. Don't set
| things down in random spots, pick it up and it goes where it
| belongs.
| [deleted]
| RagnarD wrote:
| "everything needs to have a home."
|
| This, absolutely.
| JTbane wrote:
| If I followed this rule I wouldn't own a thing, the perks of
| living in a small room.
| wintogreen74 wrote:
| It's also going to vary greatly based on the individual. Some
| people have homes that look like ocean going ships, with
| nothing that's not permanently attached or stowed neatly
| away. Others have shit everywhere. Both scenarios are fine if
| you're comfortable with living that way.
| cactusplant7374 wrote:
| It's good to be somewhere in the middle because then no one
| is angry when the process breaks down every so often. Now I
| know someone is going to say that the process won't break
| down because I AM IN CHARGE and monitoring the process. And
| that's exactly why it's good to be in the middle. :)
| amelius wrote:
| > everything needs to have a home
|
| Does it count if everything goes into one big box?
|
| Or if I just declare the living room as the home for my
| stuff?
| karaterobot wrote:
| At that point, you've successfully outsmarted yourself.
| snarf21 wrote:
| I think a lot of people would be a lot happier in life if
| they got rid of half their crap. Then in 6 months get rid of
| half of what is left. It is a hard battle but I keep trying
| to get rid of more and more stuff and it is so nice to walk
| into a storage shed that is more and more empty. Everything
| remaining is needed and there is no hunting or looking for
| things as everything is easily accessible.
| alexose wrote:
| I recently read an account from someone who manages a
| chemistry(?) lab that's used by multiple teams of people.
| He'd spent years trying to come up with the perfect storage
| system, only to realize that the _only_ thing that
| consistently works is to reduce inventory.
|
| I've been applying that to my own life lately, and I think
| he's right.
| throwaway4aday wrote:
| "To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of
| junk." --Thomas Edison
|
| I have a lot of stuff, probably too much. Some of it I
| haven't touched in years but only a relatively small
| portion of it would I consider getting rid of. I tend to go
| through cycles of interests where I will work on some
| category of thing for a few months and produce a few items
| and then I'll exhaust my creativity in the matter and leave
| it to lie fallow. Later on I'll pick up the pursuit again
| and I happily have everything I need to hand. Nothing is
| worse than being in the midst of making something and
| realizing you haven't got the part you need, you're left
| with a few options: to buy it, scavenge it, or make it; all
| of which take time and effort away from the thing you are
| working on.
|
| The minimalist life may appeal to some, I can understand
| the sentiment. I've spent holidays away from home in a
| serenely empty cabin with nothing but nature and a book.
| It's pleasant but it grows tiresome after a while and I
| yearn to be back in the shed, tinkering and building.
| jrumbut wrote:
| I'm much the same, I've been down to having my whole life
| fit in a backpack and currently am spread all over a
| three bedroom house. Too much space and, strangely, too
| much organization make me anxious long term.
|
| I find my ad hoc organizational style is by far the most
| effective for me. It's like a LIFO data structure. The
| most frequently used items (phone, laptop, TV remote) are
| in the easiest to reach places. My beach and fishing
| stuff are near the door in the summer, the salt and
| shovel make their way there in the winter.
|
| I think people with the rotational-evolving quality tend
| to organize things in time rather than space, which
| doesn't look right to most people who think the other way
| around.
| ghaff wrote:
| I have one friend whose house is basically probably a
| candidate for one of the hoarders shows. Then my dad and
| brother are both basically of the nothing out of place
| school.
|
| I tend to be the Goldilocks principle. I do get rid of
| things that I know I'll never use--especially if they're
| bulky. But I don't mind keeping things around that I may
| get back into someday. Or want for the occasional thing.
| And I can keep some magazines and piles of books lying
| around, seasonal clothing piles, travel stuff grab boxes,
| etc. laying around without them taking over. If people
| were coming over, I might spend an hour tidying up but
| it's a happy medium for me for the most part.
| mikrotikker wrote:
| You're coming at this the wrong way, the solution is build
| more sheds.
| jmcmaster wrote:
| ADHD weaker object permanence means that lots of people need to
| see their stuff to keep it in mind. "Hiding stuff" is
| problematic (and so is clutter).
| emsixteen wrote:
| This is the issue for me.
| cja wrote:
| Hiding the belongings of someone with ADHD is disabling them.
| Work with them, not against them.
| CipherThrowaway wrote:
| Non-ADHD weaker clutter tolerance means that lots of people
| need to hide stuff to keep it from bothering them.
|
| Clutter intolerance can have a profound impact on daily life
| for sufferers. Many will engage in maladaptive coping
| strategies such as ritualistic tidying and avoiding cluttered
| rooms or spaces. Whether tolerance can be improved through
| therapy is an area of active research. Unfortunately, clutter
| intolerance is thought to be neurobiological.
| papandada wrote:
| This is hilarious -- though I have been shamed throughout
| my life for clutter as though it were a moral defect.
| cwillu wrote:
| I had a couple friends barge into my suite and tidy
| everything up because they were worried about me.
|
| "There, doesn't that feel better?"
|
| "Yes [I will say anything that will make you go away, and
| then I will cower in the corner of a room that is no longer
| my bedroom in a suite that is no longer my home]"
| ilyt wrote:
| The problem is that someone else does it. If I put a thing
| away and find a spot for it I will remember. But if someone
| else without my hierarchy for stuff does it it will
| inevitably land in a place I will not even think to search in
| the first place.
| uoaei wrote:
| Exactly. I'm already busy keeping the means and motivations
| of my completing a task in working memory, adding more
| cognitive load increases the chance that I get derailed and
| have to gather myself again.
| papandada wrote:
| I have this, though it most often shows up as "to-do
| impermanence" -- I have to keep tasks very visible or they
| disappear. Come to think of it, I'm a bit like the guy in
| Memento, I even need to remind myself of the whole history
| and motivation for a task every time I come to it.
| odiroot wrote:
| No, it's the opposite. Things placed randomly and visibly
| just add to the mental overhead. They easily distract.
| dirtyid wrote:
| That's why I steer away from open shelves, everything gets
| chucked into their respective drawer to keep things tidy.
| Getting partner be onboard with drawer organization probably
| deadend if they're not into it, but most things need a
| convenient place to hide.
|
| Also I firmly believe really nice drawer hardware, like soft
| close and good runners can encourage this behaviour by making
| operation enjoyable. Grew up with very satisfyingly click put
| to open drawers, in retrospect not as functional as direct
| pulling, but man that click conditioned me to want to tidy.
| actionablefiber wrote:
| It is nice to put away things - keeps down the mental clutter
| and keeps the area looking nice - but I have to say I
| viscerally disagree with the practice of moving other people's
| things without permission and without telling them the new
| location. It is bad communication and absolutely guaranteed to
| start a fight. Keeping each other up to date and setting common
| expectations on where things should "live" is important.
| euroderf wrote:
| "Out of sight, out of mind."
|
| Ideally I'd have ceiling-to-floor shelves EVERYWHERE.
|
| GTD says your mind is not so much storing to-do's as for
| processing them. Likewise, the contents of spaces. Memorizing
| contents is unnecessary mind clutter.
| j45 wrote:
| This is true, and as a balance ..except when their and what
| they like to look at (which might be nothing) is still out.
|
| If you're in the bottom drawers, less closet space, back of the
| fridge, at the bottom of the pile, the the more awkward storage
| space, fewer drawers, appliances that like to be seen but not
| used, or more of your stuff is in storage it might not entirely
| be you.
|
| At the same time it's valuable to learn to build shared storage
| solutions jointly to let both (and little ones) put the items
| most used, important or at hand is a critical skill to develop
| together, early on.
|
| Otherwise deferral or indifference can be quite tough when one
| of you might have a change of heart.
|
| There are many thinna that happen in life where you will
| literally not remember to do.something (medication, etc) if
| it's not sitting out on the counter.
| jxramos wrote:
| yah there's a saying surrounding that I believe, cluttered
| space, cluttered mind. I think there's something to it, keeping
| a bunch of stuff in sleep mode in some back corner mental stack
| of your mind that gets subliminally refreshed each time you
| visually glance over strewn clutter.
| progman32 wrote:
| For some, this is a feature. I need to keep my stuff out so
| everything gets at least a couple brain cycles every day. I
| work in a generalist shop though with many concurrent (and
| very different) projects so it's not for everyone. Never
| liked spreadsheets/ticketing systems for this. I keep
| separate files for each project but need to physically see
| the objects for it to work for my mind.
|
| Part of the motivation is the minor discomfort of seeing so
| many projects open and set aside. For me the solution is to
| complete projects, not categorize and hide everything.
| jxramos wrote:
| definitely, there's something about using physical space as
| long term mental storage in effect. It's best when the
| zones are not mixed, projects out at the garage table vs
| the dining room table. When the zones overlap that's when
| trouble and collisions occur. The pandemic made me realize
| why having a dedicated home office space is a prized thing.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| There is a book I read recently called _Goodbye, Things_. It 's
| like a more interesting version of _The Life-Changing Magic of
| Tidying Up_ , as it talks more about the feeling of being a
| minimalist than TLCMTU does, which is more practical.
|
| It talks about needing less space in general and being more
| free, simply by having fewer things, since things beget things;
| the more things you have, the more organizational containers
| you need, in turn creating yet more things and yet more space
| to store them in. Since then, I've tried to actively limit the
| amount of things and space they take up, since I hate clutter,
| but I hate organization as well.
| sparks1970 wrote:
| A good book which addresses the perception that "possessions
| are a projection of my true self" but it lost me when the
| author describes limiting himself to a single towel to both
| dry himself out of the shower and to dry dishes...
| satvikpendem wrote:
| [dead]
| dghughes wrote:
| My theory of how cupboard doors were invented is people had
| shelves but didn't want to see all their crap displayed in the
| open. Hiding equals neatness.
|
| What was that HN article recently of Las Vegas and windows on
| buildings more of something causes distress and less is more
| soothing to a point.
| jongjong wrote:
| I disagree. I like to have all my possessions in clear view;
| that way, when I need them, I don't need to search for them.
| scotty79 wrote:
| I have no idea why some people have this urge to hide all
| things.
|
| When I hide things I just forget that I have half of them
| almost immediately. Let alone remembering where I have them.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well there are other benefits like dust and cat protection.
| Having transparent cabinet doors and drawers would make sense
| though.
| gpderetta wrote:
| There is "putting things back where they belong so you they
| don't clutter and you know where they are next time you need
| them" and "put things out of the way in a random place so
| that they are effectively lost".
|
| Then there is me looking for something for half an hour or
| more then finally finding it exactly where it was supposed to
| be.
| Izkata wrote:
| There is also "putting things in easy to reach locations so
| they're always where you expect to find them", which looks
| like clutter to other people.
| dyingkneepad wrote:
| Maybe that's just a sign you have a lot of stuff you don't
| even need in the first place?
| blahedo wrote:
| YES
|
| I can have things that get "put away" i.e. in a
| container/cabinet/drawer/room IF that container will be
| something that I open and access at least every other day.
| Otherwise, things that get put away out of sight are GONE
| until I accidentally stumble across them years later.
|
| Limited exception: if there is a tool or device or something
| that is so uniquely suited for a task that when presented
| with a task where it would be useful I will immediately think
| of the tool--and thus remember that I have it--I can safely
| store it away, as long as the place I'll put it is the first
| place that I'd look for it.
| andrewnicolalde wrote:
| What are some examples of things which you would forget
| about?
| sangnoir wrote:
| You need to have a system; so it's not exactly "remembering"
| where you put things, but deducing where an items ought to be
| and going there to find it. It's similar to people who put
| all files on the desktop vs organizing files into a hierarchy
| of folders.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| A hierarchy of folders is great for hierarchical data like
|
| Accounts>2020>July>july_20.xlsx
|
| For other stuff is a nightmare because it often could be in
| 2 places. Maybe you have a folder for <bosses_name> and one
| for HR...now your boss asks you for that hr thing he asked
| you to do 2 years ago, where is it?
|
| I give my non-hierarchical files filenames with as much
| meta data as possible, and stick them all in one folder.
| Search does the rest.
|
| I save my temporary files in my downloads folder. Now and
| again I delete stuff from a year or so ago.
| e40 wrote:
| There are common areas and then there are zones where people
| park stuff. I've tried to get my SO to put stuff I leave in
| public areas in one of my zones, rather than putting it
| somewhere I will never find it.
|
| It's also a battle because of the clutter, 10% of it is mine,
| and I never move their stuff.
|
| The problem comes in when there's something that could
| reasonably be trash (usually a box that I might need to return
| something) gets tossed. :(
|
| EDIT: change "private zones" to "public zones"
| FujiApple wrote:
| You know you're in a long term relationship when your better
| half starts throwing away your stuff without asking.
| rjh29 wrote:
| It wouldn't be acceptable to me in any length of
| relationship. Different strokes for different folks.
| balfirevic wrote:
| That's a good way to make me strongly reconsider being in
| that relationship.
| dougmwne wrote:
| Oof, no please ask. 15 years in and manners still matter.
| bckr wrote:
| And it's also important to keep your stuff in separate
| places so that there's no question about whose it is or
| whether it should be tossed
| throwaway744678 wrote:
| Oh, man.
|
| Our home has a two-stage "recycle bin" policy, though: some
| of my stuff "gets moved" to a random box in the cellar; if I
| don't ask for it for a few months, it gets "donated". You
| know.
| yojo wrote:
| Haha. We do that with our kids' old toys - rarely comes
| into play, but saves much heartache when it does.
|
| There's a similar trick for papers covering your desk;
| without looking, shove them all in a Manila folder, date,
| and seal. If you haven't felt compelled to open it in three
| months, throw it away without opening.
|
| Admittedly the utility depends on how much you/your office
| likes paper. Or if you go to an office.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| > without looking, shove them all in a Manila folder,
| date, and seal. If you haven't felt compelled to open it
| in three months, throw it away without opening.
|
| This needs to be ~1 year, to make sure there's nothing
| important for taxes in the pile.
| yojo wrote:
| This was specific to work-in-the-office desks, which I
| never bring my personal papers to. But yes, don't try
| this with your home office!
| DavidPeiffer wrote:
| > There's a similar trick for papers covering your desk;
| without looking, shove them all in a Manila folder, date,
| and seal. If you haven't felt compelled to open it in
| three months, throw it away without opening.
|
| My family moved into our house when I was 3. Around age 9
| we were going to finish the basement and a stack of boxes
| from the move came into discussion. When I proposed the
| idea, it was not really considered by my parents.
|
| I've proposed it again to my wife after a move or two,
| and again she didn't take me up on it.
|
| Maybe someday I'll get to give the method a shot.
| ilyt wrote:
| I thought about that
|
| Just put random crap in a box with a date in it. You can
| take it out if it is useful but you can't put new stuff in.
| Once the date is up, toss/sell it.
|
| Basically expiration date for stuff.
| Geloto wrote:
| What?
|
| Never.
|
| I never would do that and my wife never did this.
| agilob wrote:
| but I might need this cable in 10 years!! fast forward 5
| years, I needed a VGA cable and it was nowhere to be found
| OJFord wrote:
| I have all my cables in (categorised) 5L Really Useful
| Boxes. It's probably too many anyway, but I reasoned if 5L
| isn't enough to contain them, then either the category is
| too broad or I don't need the cable I'm trying to fit in.
| ZiiS wrote:
| _reconsiders_ the 7 21L Really useful Boxes of cables.
| thrtythreeforty wrote:
| I find it helps to think of this scenario as paying
| Amazon/eBay $4 to store it for you for several years.
| agilob wrote:
| but then I would be giving Amazon money, when my drawer
| can do it for free.
| mmh0000 wrote:
| Its not free though, is it?
|
| You're spending mental power indexing all the things you
| have. I assume you pay for your dwelling, dollars-per-
| sqft is a thing to consider.
|
| Doing the Amazon route (which is exactly what I do) means
| I know I have every cables I could ever need within 24
| hours. And I don't have to remember where I last put it,
| and I don't have to deal with knotted cables, and I don't
| have to wonder when a thing doesn't work, is it the
| cable?
| RealityVoid wrote:
| > and I don't have to wonder when a thing doesn't work,
| is it the cable?
|
| I'd say Amazon is not necessarily a guarantee of that.
|
| Instant access to useful items is valuable. Think of it
| like... caching for tools. I like having items I need
| within reach. I'd love a bag like Hermione's in Harry
| Potter.
|
| Waiting 24h is a lot if you're in flow and you want that
| thing _now_ dammit!
| RealityVoid wrote:
| It's not really free of you can't find shit anywhere
| because of the many cables in the drawer, you meet to
| move it around if wou redecorate or move and you need
| increased home space to store all the stuff.
|
| I like having tools in my home, don't get me wrong, but
| storage being free is an illusion. I still think the cost
| to be worth it.
| agilob wrote:
| Ok I get it, but it's not a quantitative cost.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| I'd say it's not unquantifiable. The higher rent (or
| mortgage) you need to pay, the time loss for organisation
| and retrieval. It's small for one item, but it adds up
| and it's a recurring not a one time cost that you _could_
| attach a number to.
| Sebb767 wrote:
| Except it's 10$ and shipped in three days - unless you
| pay 16$ and get it tomorrow, which is unfortunately not
| when you need that monitor to work.
|
| Even then, it's most likely even more expensive, because
| if it's just an off-the-shelf HDMI cable, you'd probably
| have one around. Look for the cheapest SCSI cable, if you
| don't think so.
|
| I don't want to say 'store everything', but just
| backordering stuff is much more expensive in my
| experience.
| somehnguy wrote:
| I'm also a cable hoarder - lots of electronic related
| hobbies and you never know what you might need. My solution
| was buying a big pack of velcro cable ties and clear
| storage bins. One evening I sat down and cable wrapped
| every single one, then sorted into bins by the type of
| cable - power, audio/video, USB, networking, etc. Slap a
| label onto the front of each bin.
|
| The bins sit neatly on a shelf and I know exactly where to
| find any type of cable I need. The cable wraps prevent them
| from turning into giant tangled messes.
| filoleg wrote:
| This is going to sound really dumb, but how exactly do
| you wrap your cables using velcro/zip ties? I tried the
| intuitive "roll it in a 5-6in circle, then maybe fold,
| squish, and then secure by a tie in the middle", but i am
| not sure if there is a better way. That one feels
| somewhat messy.
| agilob wrote:
| >velcro cable ties
|
| Not zip ties.
|
| I'm not the person you're asking.
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| I like the velcro cables ties that stay attached to the
| cable, like [1]. Wrap the cable in a loop, then secure
| the loop with the velcro. Larger cables get two ties on
| opposing sides. Do not squish the cable because it will
| get all kinked; just keep it in a loop, and stack all
| your wrapped cables as a cylinder.
|
| The diameter of the circle depends on the cable length
| and thickness. 2m USB cable should be 10cm, 3m power cord
| should be 20cm, and 10m Ethernet cable should be 30cm.
|
| [1] https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/8-x-1-2-Black-and-Gray-
| Cable-Ti...
| brailsafe wrote:
| Shortly after moving in with my gf into a tiny space, I
| realized that beyond, but including your realization, sometimes
| they just like to move stuff around occasionally. I think my
| father's lack of realizing and accepting this is what's led him
| to ruin any living situation he's ever had, because he just
| can't give up a little control and share autonomy over a
| combined space.
|
| I notice this in reverse as well, it's probably best when
| moving in with someone to get a new place and set expectations
| early.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| I'm trying to convince my wife that this is the way to go, but
| she keeps yelling at me for hiding her stuff in the bathroom (I
| even bought drawer organizers!). I've taken a break from doing
| it, but it took me personally 40 years to figure it out, and
| she is a gen younger, so we have time.
| Enginerrrd wrote:
| I had a similar epiphany. I realized that I would leave things
| out in random piles as a reminder system. And more piles of
| things that I knew I SHOULD deal with, but didn't know HOW to
| deal with.
|
| I realized also that this is a TERRIBLE reminder system. I
| started putting everything in OneNote and my calendar via the
| Getting Things Done Methodology, and I'm honestly upset that no
| one ever taught me such a system a long time ago. I've been
| told a million times to "use a planner", "write things down",
| "use a calendar", "use a notebook" etc. etc., but no one ever
| told me HOW to use those things. Getting Things Done is awesome
| because it told me almost exactly how to use that stuff, and
| the effect has been life-changing for me. My spaces have never
| been cleaner, and I've never been more effective in my life.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| it sounds funny, but I gotta tell you, the opposite is never
| true.
|
| You can't hide their makeup that they are not using, the 10
| bottles of shampoo with different colors and allegedly
| different properties, the 7 bottles of hair conditioner etc etc
|
| So everyday I wake up to something like this, but worse
|
| https://i0.wp.com/blog.cliomakeup.com/wp-content/uploads/201...
|
| Lucky us we have two bathrooms, so we can keep one tidy, right?
|
| WRONG!
|
| The second bathroom is for the exclusive use of our 2 cats.
|
| Could I have a say about it?
|
| Of course not.
|
| Is it logical?
|
| Absolutely not.
|
| People don't want to see other people's crap, but are more than
| happy to live surrounded by their own.
|
| If there's a paradise, many people deserve it just for going
| through all of this, every day.
| scythe wrote:
| >The whole point of putting things away is to hide them! No one
| wants to look at your crap when you're not using it.
|
| Well, there is another reason. When your room has a consistent
| default state, it's easier to look around the room and notice
| anything that is unusual. It makes the room into a sort of
| sensor. When it is always changing states -- things here one
| day, there another -- any changes can be missed.
| Subconsciously, we usually feel calmer when we know what's
| going on around us, which is facilitated by an orderly
| living/working environment.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| > The whole point of putting things away is to hide them!
|
| I think that it is rather to have them all in one place, and
| that they do not take the place of other things or are in your
| way.
|
| The fact that they are hidden is because they are behind a
| door, probably to avoid that catching dust.
| teucris wrote:
| I will caveat this with something I learned from "How to Keep
| House While Drowning" - an incredible book for overwhelmed
| parents, neurodivergent people, and those going through
| depression:
|
| Make your home work for you, don't work for your home.
|
| If that means the best way for you to live your life is to
| leave things out so you can find them more easily, then do
| that. Chances are though that having a "home" for everything
| (mentioned in other comments) is going to work better for you.
| It's a process of learning and iteration.
| k1t wrote:
| "We own things, but have hidden them."
|
| https://nathanwpyle.threadless.com/designs/we-own-things/hom...
| nerdponx wrote:
| Think of it as hiding it from household dust.
| kzrdude wrote:
| Yes, anything that's out gets grimy and dusty eventually.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Oof. Flashbacks to living 75ish meters off a gravel road as
| a kid.
| nerdponx wrote:
| Or in New York City, where the combination of vehicle
| exhaust particulates, poor airflow in many apartments,
| and old masonry dust causes every surface to look like a
| haunted house within a month if you aren't on top of
| things.
| worthless-trash wrote:
| And if you're in the tropics, everything in gets grimy and
| moldy quickly!
| derbOac wrote:
| For me at least the bigger point of putting things away is
| actually to find them quicker later.
| everyone wrote:
| I totally disagree. If you use something fairly regularly then
| leave it out in the spot where it is used all the time.. What
| harm does something merely being visible do? .. Hiding it away
| does harm as 1. You will waste time putting it away and
| retrieving it every time you use it 2. there's the extra mental
| load of remembering where it goes 3. you may forget where it
| is.
|
| This reminds me of the difference between 'tidy' and
| 'organised' .. They are independent properties and an area may
| be very tidy while being very disorganized and vice versa.. Eg.
| typical thing where if there is a pile of random crap on a
| table someone will dump it all into a drawer. The area is now
| more 'tidy' but also more disorganized.
|
| Tidiness is superficial, whereas being organized has practical
| benefits.
| locallost wrote:
| I don't think it's about not wanting to look at things - my
| wife once moved something from me from the bathroom above the
| sink to a shelf, and I got pissed I couldn't find it. She said
| it was too much stuff there. I then went there and counted 17
| things that belonged to her, and 2 that belonged to me, 1 of
| which was apparently too much.
|
| In my experience women do this a lot. I don't know if it's some
| kind of an evolutionary thing. On the one hand that it was
| something women traditionally did and can't let go, on the
| other that it is/was a way to make themselves more important.
| You become very important when somebody needs you all the time
| to tell them where things are.
| JohnAaronNelson wrote:
| Maybe your anecdotes don't define the evolutionary history of
| women?
| locallost wrote:
| Maybe, I really don't know.
| timeon wrote:
| I have this experience too. But I think it is more general:
| people are more critical of others then themselves.
| cynicalsecurity wrote:
| Also, never shout at your wife.
| rjmill wrote:
| 100% agree. If it makes you feel better, I didn't actually
| yell or raise my voice.
|
| I chose the word "yelled" because it was the simplest way to
| imply the frustration/betrayal/hurt I was feeling at the
| time. In retrospect, I could have said, "cried out," and
| captured the emotion/action more accurately without
| sacrificing brevity. But that phrase didn't occur to me at
| the time.
|
| Words are hard.
| tootie wrote:
| I used to complain to my mom that I left stuff on the floor on
| purpose because I could find it faster. 30 years later my
| daughter said the same thing to me and I just nodded and shut
| her door.
| gpderetta wrote:
| I mean, that's obviously LRU caching.
| asah wrote:
| Our place has a ton of different storage locations... we solved
| it with a spreadsheet.
| balderdash wrote:
| This seems like the solution is worse than the problem!
| moffkalast wrote:
| When you need a WMS for your place it may be an indicator
| that you have too much stuff.
| ilyt wrote:
| Or just hobby with many required SKUs. I dabble in
| electronics and that is in hundreds different parts.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Can relate, I also dabble but a few of these[1] sort of
| organizer sets plus handful of full sized drawers are
| enough to hold just about everything I've got. With
| labelled drawers and sets split by semantic type I'm not
| sure there's anything I could need a spreadsheet for.
| Unless you've got a truly absurd amount of parts there
| heh.
|
| [1] https://images.thdstatic.com/productImages/a34bd723-d
| 555-429...
| watwut wrote:
| Tho, I do not mind seeing partners stuff and like to have mine
| own in sight. It makes me more active - seeing that stuff make
| me want to interact with it. When I put books and crafting
| things somewhere I do not see, that project effectively died.
| rjh29 wrote:
| Absolutely, that's basic human psychology. If you want to
| practice guitar, put the guitar on a stand near your
| desk/couch where you can see it. Hiding it away just for the
| sake of 'tidiness' defeats the point.
| machiaweliczny wrote:
| Swallowing ;) I learned from ortodontist that the reason I don't
| have nice teeth arch and the reason that I have trouble with
| pills is because of ,,infantile swallowing", basically pressing
| tongue to lower teeth and not lower palate. Learning this solved
| so many of my problems. This lowers efficiency of breathing and
| make you snore and might be related to sleep apnea and this makes
| you tired and depressed so please check your kids.
| jethkl wrote:
| I thought colorblindness tests were designed to be tricky and
| subtle, so I always passed them through very close inspection.
| I'm just colorblind.
| impalallama wrote:
| oh no
| maushu wrote:
| You should try a reverse colorblindness test like this:
| https://www.colorlitelens.com/color-blindness-test/secret-of...
| Moissanite wrote:
| That is one of the worst designed things I have ever seen.
| The instructions barely made sense at all for the first test,
| and for subsequent ones where you can enter 2 responses there
| is absolutely no indication what should be going on.
| ericpauley wrote:
| Wow, I was expecting this to be hyperbole but you're right.
| No clue what you're actually supposed to do on this site.
| bena wrote:
| Yeah, I'm not sure what I did. But I went from question
| 1, to question 2, to question 2, then I saw a button
| saying "FINISH", so I clicked it and I got 12 answers
| wrong.
| lynndotpy wrote:
| They're a site that sells goggles for the colorblind, so
| either way I wouldn't trust their colorblind diagnoses.
| stuckkeys wrote:
| I just took a test. I cannot see shit in color. Haha. Fuk! Do
| those glasses actually help reverse this? I can clearly see
| RGB. But some hues look the same. Are people born color blind
| or is this wear and tear kind of situation?
| zenexer wrote:
| Ignore this test. It doesn't work on a computer. You need
| to take in in-person using specially-printed images.
| OJFord wrote:
| Maybe they don't work to rule it out, but I _am_
| colourblind (as diagnosed in-person with specially-
| printed images by a professional optician) and when
| people have pointed me at these images on computers (only
| slightly less annoying than 'can you see this?', 'what
| colour is my shirt?') they've always 'worked' as
| expected.
| zenexer wrote:
| I've been in a lot of ophthalmologist's offices for a variety
| of issues, and even had surgery as a child to correct one of
| them. The one issue I do not have is color blindness--and
| I've been given a lot of these tests.
|
| This website doesn't work on my iPhone's screen. It's
| impossible to discern most of the numbers, and the UI doesn't
| instill confidence. Are they just using this garbage to hock
| their glasses to people who don't need them?
|
| This website is thoroughly broken, and nobody should even use
| it as a suggestion that they are or aren't colorblind.
| poulpy123 wrote:
| I think the numbers are visibles only if you have color
| blindness
| econonut wrote:
| That's right. maushu even said it's a reverse color
| blindness test. If you can't see any of the numbers, then
| you likely do not experience red-green color blindness.
| pwinnski wrote:
| It's a completely broken test. The "correct" answers at
| the end indicate two-digits numbers for "plates" when
| only a single-digit answer was possible.
|
| I, without color-blindness, can't make out any numbers. A
| coworker who is red/green colorblind also could not make
| out any numbers. Then the results, as I said, show that
| the whole process was broken from the start.
| jansan wrote:
| I actually laughed at this one, you are a real hacker.
| nbaugh1 wrote:
| Had a friend who was absolutely convinced we were all pranking
| him when doing a colorblindness test. We were all doing the
| test because about 15 minutes prior, someone had asked him to
| grab a pink object off of a shelf and he came back with a green
| one in total seriousness
| antognini wrote:
| My mom had me tested in kindergarten when we were learning
| the colors and I couldn't get pink right. I kept confusing it
| with white.
| bobmaxup wrote:
| My kindergarten teacher basically beat me with their voice
| for not being able to get my colors correct. Two years
| later during art class, I was sent to the school nurse to
| find out I was colorblind. However, they never told anyone,
| not even my parents.
|
| It really should be a part of general screening upon
| admittance to primary school. Then again, this was 30 years
| ago, so maybe it is now.
| canucker2016 wrote:
| In grade 6, an adult came in to class to do a colourblind
| test on everyone.
|
| Projection screen was lowered, lights turned off, and a
| series of multi-coloured dots on many slides were
| displayed one after another on the screen.
|
| In the dots, there were numbers / letters in colours
| different from the general background colour of the
| slide.
|
| Adult: "Can everyone see the number?"
|
| Almost everyone: "YESSSSSS."
|
| One boy: "Ummm - there's no number on the screen!"
|
| Pregnant pause.
|
| One boy: "Oh yeah. Now I see it."
|
| Almost everyone turns their head to look at that one boy.
|
| Test continues.
|
| Afterwards, the one boy was selected for further
| consultation...
| solarmist wrote:
| Lol, yeah, sometimes an analytical mind works against you by
| taking things too seriously.
|
| This is when it would've been good to ask someone about it.
| abetusk wrote:
| Have you tried using those colorblind glasses? Maybe something
| like Enchroma [0] or dichroic filters?
|
| [0] https://enchroma.com/
| bragr wrote:
| I can't speak for OP's colorblindness, but for me those do
| basically nothing.
| tstrimple wrote:
| I bought some for my son for his birthday. His response was
| "meh" so I returned them and he got some cash.
| solarmist wrote:
| Yeah, they only help a specific subset of color blindness.
| But for the ones they do help it's significant.
| vegardx wrote:
| This company has so shady marketing. They don't work as
| advertised.
|
| The way they hire actors to play out wholesome videos and
| upload them to YouTube as if it's organic content, with
| massive fake users to comment and push up false claims and
| down vote brigade all negative comments should tell you all
| you need about this shady company.
| rbt5009 wrote:
| I'm highly red/green colorblind. I got a pair of these as a
| gift and they allow me to differentiate between reds/greens
| much more clearly and to see red where I wouldn't notice
| without them. I know for some people they don't do much, but
| it makes hikes and such much more colorful for me!
| solarmist wrote:
| Ooo! Good tip. Hiking with them.
| [deleted]
| rbt5009 wrote:
| I'm also colorblind and this cracked me up. I sent your comment
| to my friends who don't believe I can't see the numbers in
| those tests.
| gregors wrote:
| It's been awhile, but learning to set my side mirrors correctly
| on my car. Once set correctly my blind spot isn't 0%, but it was
| dramatically reduced by 95% or so. That's also when I learned
| only the passenger side mirror is convex (in the States) the
| driver side isn't.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIkodlp8HMM
| causi wrote:
| Adding little round stick-on mirrors can vastly improve your
| situational awareness.
| webdoodle wrote:
| I should have become a goat farmer...
| the_only_law wrote:
| I should have done _something_ else at this point anything.
| silverwasthere wrote:
| You-buntu vs oo-buntu,
|
| Something coworkers from years ago still like to give me grief
| about.
| alexb_ wrote:
| I've heard the third option of "oo-BOO-ntu" many times.
| layer8 wrote:
| Actually, all three vowels are "oo" sounds.
| [deleted]
| mtlynch wrote:
| Wait, which one is right?
| mgomez wrote:
| The one without the "y":
|
| > Ubuntu is an ancient African word meaning 'humanity to
| others'. It can also be interpreted as 'I am what I am
| because of who we all are'. The Ubuntu operating system
| brings the spirit of Ubuntu to the world of computing. And
| one last extra question for the road...
|
| > How do you pronounce Ubuntu? Many people don't get it right
| the first time, but it's pronounced: oo'boontoo.
|
| > There's no 'y' at the beginning!
|
| https://ubuntu.com/blog/top-10-questions-about-ubuntu
| mtlynch wrote:
| Thanks!
| ngumuntu wrote:
| [dead]
| leephillips wrote:
| "Debian".
| altdataseller wrote:
| Jinx
| mtlynch wrote:
| Wait, which one of us is the real me?
| altdataseller wrote:
| Wait, which one is correct?
| ROTMetro wrote:
| Telling myself that I have no worth. Thinking that lead me to
| believe the only way to demonstrate my worth is to be superman at
| work. Being superman allowed me to demonstrate my value each day
| (corresponds to the 'but what have you done for me lately'
| mindset of American tech culture), allowed me to get validation
| that I was not worthless. That drive helped me professionally,
| which helped me demonstrate my worth as a provider, because
| obviously without the nice house, new cars, etc my wife would
| leave me (even though she didn't ask for these things). Being
| superman burned me out and took up all my time. Which lead to
| worse relationships with my wife/kids, which re-enforced I had no
| value/worth. We tried an external solution of moving to the
| countryside. But ultimately my thinking broke me completely. My
| court ordered rehab counselor trips out on it. He's like dude,
| you are a person, you lived better than I ever will, you helped
| tens of thousands of people in a demonstrable way (software I
| wrote and was the name on patents for had some life changing
| impacts), all of the women in this office comment on how it's
| crazy you are attractive and have no partner, talking to you you
| are well educated, present yourself well and people like you. In
| group you are the natural leader. Dude none of your thinking
| makes any sense. I hear him say it, but inside I know. I put on a
| good show, I can convince people I am a person, but I know the
| truth. I have no value. Everyone in group will see through and
| realize it eventually. I don't know how to change this or get
| past it.
|
| But I want to. I want friends. But I can't accept friends,
| because they will find out I have no worth, so I only have
| acquaintances. Honestly, I want my best friend back, my ex, but
| that is way gone.
|
| Being superman != a way to measure your worth. Work != the value
| of you. You != nothing.
|
| Be kind to yourself, show yourself love. You have value. I know
| that you do. If only I knew that I do too.
| bmn__ wrote:
| My good man, a therapist is certain to help you overcome this
| false and harmful belief that continues to destroy your life.
| Start tomorrow.
| ROTMetro wrote:
| Been there done that. It actually led to my final spiral out
| of control.
|
| The court ordered person I work with has been the best help.
| He doesn't fuck around. While the therapist said 'why do you
| feel this way...why do you think that...blah blah' this guy
| was the first person my whole life to say 'dude, you have
| value, I wish you could see the person I see'. I can't
| explain what hearing that did for me. Especially from someone
| that knows ALL the good and the bad. I can't use my 'but if
| he only knew' cop out.
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| I eat hotdogs "sideways". Since I don't put condiments on mine, I
| eat it so there's bun on top like a hamburger would be.
| cafard wrote:
| Several years ago, I was reading the NYRB selections from
| Thoreau's journals. Somewhere well into it, he wrote of talking
| with a friend, and the two deciding that perhaps they were tying
| their shoes wrong. They switched the order of the first cross-
| over, and found the results much better.
|
| I tried it (age 50-something), and discovered that I no longer
| needed to double-knot my shoes.
| ornornor wrote:
| How to tie my shoes. If if loop around the other way than I
| normally do, the bow stands parallel to the ground plane instead
| of vertical and gets tighter over time instead of looser and
| undone. I don't have to constantly retie my shoes anymore since
| figuring that out.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| Do you have to tie a double knot to keep your shoes from coming
| untied? Do your loops end up pointing down at your toes and up
| your leg instead of pointing to the sides of your shoe? Do you
| shoes come untied all the time? You are probably tying a granny
| knot instead of a square knot.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAFcV7zuUDA
| mhb wrote:
| Ice might not be the best treatment for aches, pains, muscle
| sprains, etc.:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34051860
| hammock wrote:
| This is relatively new, I wouldn't classify it as "wrong" but
| "changing science/protocol"
|
| The new protocol is MEAT instead of RICE.
|
| The knowledge hasn't reached every medical provider yet
| evilbob93 wrote:
| Tying my shoes: My knots would always come out, so i got into the
| habit of tying the loops together. A few years ago, in my mid
| 50's I realized that I was tying a granny not rather than a
| square not. I made the adjustment and have never tied my loops
| together again.
| aendruk wrote:
| I used to regularly feel bad but didn't recognize the feeling as
| thirst. Turns out humans are supposed to drink water.
| pancrufty wrote:
| "Recognizing feelings" is something we can be really bad at.
|
| Occasionally I would feel "really hungry" in the morning. Only
| in my thirties I realized that that "hungry feeling" was just
| stomach pain and a direct consequence of eating late at night.
|
| Similarly, I couldn't understand why I had a headache at 5 AM.
| Hint: I hadn't gone to bed yet. Realized by my late twenties.
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| Similarly, my father had headaches on Sundays his whole adult
| life. Turns out he wasn't wasn't drinking coffee on the
| weekends so was getting withdrawal syndromes every Sunday.
| nmeofthestate wrote:
| I previously used to rinse my mouth after brushing my teeth, then
| was told not to do this. Not rinsing is a big improvement.
| mikosty wrote:
| Avoiding and suppressing uncomfortable emotions and feelings
| instead of fully accepting and acting on them. This is of course
| a huge topic in itself and easier said than done but I'm
| confident that investment on this area almost always worth it.
| You are fortunate if you got this already in childhood!
|
| Another thing would be flossing with dental brushes. Gum
| infections can ruin your health in many ways.
| sebastianconcpt wrote:
| Cutting onion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwRttSfnfcc
| lr4444lr wrote:
| Arching my lower back as a default position for sitting and
| standing and avoiding rounding my back at all times. I always
| thought that slumped posture was the most important thing to
| avoid, but this created maladaptive muscle fixedness around the
| spine, confirmed by imaging taken by orthopedists.
|
| The spine is adapted to bend multiple ways, including rounding,
| as a matter of good exercise form. It's a major function of your
| abdominal musculature, in fact, to compress the spine forward
| along the transverse plane. Just don't pick up heavy stuff that
| way or hunch over a desk all day.
| hammock wrote:
| Neutral back
| captn3m0 wrote:
| I walked wrong. When I was around 11 years old, a relative
| pointed out that my gait was weird because I placed the front-of-
| the-foot on the ground before the heel. I'm not sure if I'd done
| this for all my life, or if it was a recent habit, but once it
| was pointed out - I fixed it immediately, to the point where I
| forgot my old gait by the next few days.
| blahedo wrote:
| Not exactly "wrong", just nonstandard in the modern (western?)
| context. I've read that the toe-first gait was once relatively
| common before footwear became strong and universal---heel-
| strike walking is definitely harder on a bare heel, and more
| likely to hurt if you step barefoot on a small object.
|
| I'm able to walk either way, which was a lifesaver one time
| when I started developing shin splints (from a temporary job
| with a _lot_ of unaccustomed fast walking on concrete floors)
| but couldn 't really be off my feet--the toe-first walking was
| nearly as fast and used a completely different muscle pattern,
| so I could walk that way without triggering the inflammation.
| :)
| timerol wrote:
| Based on modern understanding of walking ergonomics, it would
| be better for you to go back to your 11 year old walking style
| pedrow wrote:
| There was a thing about tying shoelaces a few years back, for
| example this from the BBC [1]. Apparently I was doing it wrong
| but anyway I prefer the extra back exercise I get from bending
| down to retie.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT2XiPgiZK8
| high_byte wrote:
| holding pens & pencils wrong. I've known since I was in like 2nd
| grade when my teacher told me. I only tried to change it in my
| twenties with some success in my mid-late twenties. I work on the
| computer mostly so I rarely write, but I keep trying to improve!
|
| see second image here to see what I mean by wrong:
| https://thecrackedamethyst.tumblr.com/post/180226225116/appa...
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| I realised in my 20's I was tying my shoes wrong and that's why
| my laces always got lose. I don't think I ever had them loosen
| themselves since I learned the correct way from this Ted X video
| : https://www.ted.com/talks/terry_moore_how_to_tie_your_shoes?...
| kraftman wrote:
| Not my entire life, but competing with my girlfriend/wife. Trying
| to win arguments instead of trying to solve the problem. Holding
| onto resentments instead of letting them go. We used to have huge
| arguements all the time, it took having a kid together to finally
| hammer it into my head that we are on the same team, we need to
| work together. Since then we've had 2 kids under 2 during covid
| and barely argued in 4 years
| halkony wrote:
| This reminds me of an article I read some time ago written by a
| house wife. In it, she admitted to verbally abusing her husband
| and demeaning his intelligence. When he'd do things like
| accidentally put colors in the wrong wash, she would chew him
| out and belittle him for not doing it right. And of course he
| felt ashamed and uncomfortable sharing his trivial mistakes
| with his wife. Then one time she left his tools out in the rain
| and they rusted. She apologized profusely but all he said was
| "It's okay, they're only tools."
|
| It made her rethink how she treated her husband. She married
| him because she knew he was intelligent and kind, so why does
| she look for evidence to the contrary and berate him for it?
| She says their marriage was much better after she realized her
| fault in this. That article left a deep impression on me as to
| how I should treat my partner/people I respect.
| jjk166 wrote:
| Buying alcohol based mouthwash. For years the burning sensation
| was always terrible and I'd often cheat, either not using as much
| or not swishing as long as recommended. Accidentally grabbed
| alcohol free mouthwash one time and it was wonderful.
| raverbashing wrote:
| I'm not sure it's alcohol, but the worse offender on "mouthwash
| that burns" is Listerine.
|
| Alcohol or no, there's no need to get an aggressive one
| veganjay wrote:
| Breathing through my mouth.
|
| I trained myself to breathe through my nose during the day. And
| at night, I put a little piece of tape on my mouth to make sure I
| breathe through my nose.
| alainchabat wrote:
| where is your tongue position?
|
| The proper position should be on the roof of your mouth then
| you'll automatically breath with your nose.
| bloomingeek wrote:
| Assuming. As in, others understanding, maybe not believing, what
| I'm trying to get across. Others get a reasonable argument or are
| open minded. (Of course what's reasonable to me isn't always to
| others.) Others can walk their own life path instead of being led
| by others. (This is still very difficult for me as I try to
| understand how people are led by others who don't always have
| their best interest at heart.)
|
| Now I've learned to take almost nothing for granted, which makes
| me happier.
| hgomersall wrote:
| A common one is the tying of one's shoelaces. It's pretty common
| to tie the knot in an unbalanced way.
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/grannyknot.htm
| bregma wrote:
| It wasn't until I had to teach knots to Cub Scouts that I
| realized my life was a lie, at least when it came to tying
| shoes. I was the object of ridicule for 50 years but now I walk
| with confidence, and always-tied shoes.
| vehemenz wrote:
| Yep. I did this for about 30 years before I learned the correct
| way (from that site, no less).
| daRealDodo wrote:
| Worthy of the best TED talk ever: https://youtu.be/zAFcV7zuUDA
| WithinReason wrote:
| That is now outdated:
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/ianknot.htm
|
| Another view:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cBtqhq5P28
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| What does that even mean? lol. The Ted way still works and
| the shoe laces have not come undone in 10 years since I've
| been using it, so why would I change method?
| hgomersall wrote:
| It's quite hard to maintain tension with the Ian knot and
| it also doesn't speed up the initial twist. It's a good
| party trick though!
| WithinReason wrote:
| You can just leave the initial twist on the shoestring
| hirenj wrote:
| I've been using the secure version of this knot for a few
| years now, and I've been entirely satisfied with how it
| holds up in the real world!
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/secureknot.htm
| pmarreck wrote:
| I'm a full fledged adult but I also appreciate efficiency so I
| recently invested in these things and so far so awesome:
|
| Orange Elastic No Tie Shoe Laces...
| https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07PK2N1PD?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_shar...
| [deleted]
| Zecc wrote:
| Regardless of the knot itself, a heel lock also helps.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBbc6TackDQ
| lepapillon wrote:
| I came here to post this one. For about 25 years of my life I
| was tying my knots the wrong way and I just thought shoelaces
| just had to be re-tied periodically. I don't remember where I
| learnt to just tie the loop the other way. Now strain on the
| laces just serves to tighten the knot.
| Semaphor wrote:
| This was so confusing to me. Don't American kids learn how to
| tie their shoes properly? Here in Germany, I was taught that in
| kindergarten.
| CSMastermind wrote:
| The knots being discussed are similar with one small
| difference: the direction you wrap the shoelace during one
| step.
|
| The "incorrect" knot still works relatively well and looks
| almost the same as the "correct" knot. The "incorrect" one
| also requires significantly less finger dexterity which is
| why children tend to prefer it.
| Semaphor wrote:
| Yeah, that is what we learned, not to make the shoddy knot.
| derekp7 wrote:
| Learning the Ian knot was life changing for me -- not only did
| it automatically correct the bow being in the correct
| orientation, but it doesn't take an inconvenient amount of time
| to tie my shoes anymore. Esp. when walking with a group, if a
| lace comes untied I can fix it without losing more than a
| couple paces.
| kuon wrote:
| I was also about to post that, and note that my wife who is
| japanese told me that in japan the correct way to tie shoelaces
| was taught at school, and she laughed for about a week when I
| told her that at 40 I didn't know that.
| songshu wrote:
| Yes and then spend a lifetime with annoying workarounds. A
| friend has been double knotting forever :(
| zzzeek wrote:
| this was my answer as well
| michaelchisari wrote:
| My doctor had me work on increasing the amount of water I drink
| in a day until I hit the recommended amount, and journaling the
| result.
|
| Turns out, I had spent most of my life dehydrated. I feel so much
| better when I drink a ton of water.
| dangwhy wrote:
| Curious. What changes have you observed from drinking more
| water.
| hoffspot wrote:
| This. I thought I had allergies that stuffed up my nose and
| sinuses my entire life. Then I started tracking my water
| intake, drinking the proper amount, and boom, my entire head
| cleared up. I'm so mad at myself for not realizing this decades
| ago.
| c120 wrote:
| When making jam or cooking anything to keep for later, not
| touching the inside of the lid after to boil it to kill germs! I
| learned that when making jam with a friend who's a doctor in a
| hospital and it's so easy to accidentally touch something to then
| comes into contact with the food. Also, to properly kill germs,
| you need to cook stuff for 7 minutes...
| enigmoid wrote:
| A few years ago I discovered that I had spent my entire life
| tying my shoes incorrectly, with a Granny Knot instead of the
| stable Square Knot (the knots are very similar). My shoes would
| always come untied and I frequently double knotted them. Now a
| single knot is always sufficient.
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/grannyknot.htm
| solarmist wrote:
| This! I've never had a good explanation, but being left handed
| I was making a granny knot about 80% of the time. I never
| figured it out consciously, but it eventually nearly stopped.
| Just the rare one.
|
| Now I understand!
| tstrimple wrote:
| Huh. Not only have I been tying my shoes incorrectly for
| decades, I've taught my children to do the same.
| wscott wrote:
| You are tying your shoes wrong: https://www.inc.com/minda-
| zetlin/theres-a-better-way-to-tie-... (tie the bow reversed from
| the square knot and it will last much longer)
|
| But then trying to come up with a good link I hit this
| alternative version which is really cool:
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/ianknot.htm
|
| Likely you can do an Ian knot reversed from the square knob, but
| I need to play with that.
| dgunay wrote:
| I hold spoons kind of "wrong"; basically put your palm facing
| down, make a fist, and then support the spoon with your thumb.
| That's how I eat soup when I'm not actively thinking about it. I
| just control the angle of the spook with my thumb.
|
| It's objectively not as flexible as the traditional spoon grip
| but I can't seem to shake the habit. Gets me strange looks
| sometimes
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Flatware grips and even orientations (tines up vs. tines down
| on a fork) can vary with culture and is also a bit tied up with
| class. What you're doing may be "correct" somewhere :-)
| yodsanklai wrote:
| Sleeping on my stomach. I'm pretty sure it makes my back/neck
| pain worse, but I'm just unable to change this habit.
| glacials wrote:
| Depends on your back. I'm a back sleeper with back pain and my
| physical therapist told me to start stomach sleeping. It helps
| a lot.
| nativespecies wrote:
| I've tried changing from stomach to side sleeping for probably
| the last 5 years and have completely failed. I have resorted to
| the "rotisserie chicken" method where I have to turn every
| which way multiple times all night to get sleep.
| intrasight wrote:
| I had a cold last week, and started going to sleep on my
| stomach because I was able to get more comfortable and relaxed.
| throwaway019254 wrote:
| So I learned recently that I was tying my shoes in the wrong way
| my whole life.
|
| The classic knot has two versions, the weak one where loops are
| more vertical, and the strong one where loops are more
| horizontal.
|
| It took me about two weeks to re-learn tying my shoes.
| benced wrote:
| Being correct is extremely overrated, it's better to allocate
| that time to doing more things or fully internalizing information
| you already know (I.e. how everyone knows it's better to take
| chances than not but basically everyone is at least somewhat
| chance-averse).
| niom wrote:
| Mental health. Haven't seen it mentioned yet.
|
| Never think of yourself as wrong, invalid, defective or unworthy.
| That's wrong. Don't do it.
|
| For about 90 % of my life I've thought about myself as defective
| in many ways.
|
| - In puberty I thought I was defective because other boys were
| talking about their crushes, how they'd like to f--- this girl or
| that girl or how they got a boner just looking at them. Later
| almost everyone got a girlfriend or two. None of that happened
| for me, so I felt defective. Turns out I'm gay.
|
| - Also in puberty I'd get random boners when sitting down in the
| bus. It made me feel ashamed and like a pervert, so I stopped
| sitting down in public transit. Turns out many boys experience
| this in puberty because, well... the vibrations. They're called
| "bus boners".
|
| - I always struggled a lot remembering faces and names. I felt
| bad about it because I thought it meant I didn't care or try
| enough. I've always had issues forming relationships and again I
| felt bad and thought I just had to try harder and make a better
| effort, which didn't work. And various other issues, and for each
| of them I thought it was a defect of myself. Turns out I'm on the
| spectrum and my parents didn't bother telling me about being
| diagnosed as a child. I only found out when bored me stumbled
| over online autism tests and _literally all of them_ came out
| strongly autistic-neurodivergent.
| solarmist wrote:
| Yes, knowing and understanding that you're not alone in your
| feelings and experiences is super important too.
|
| Another piece is understanding your body's feelings and your
| emotions. Many people aren't taught how to understand their
| feelings and emotions, especially men. This is NOT automatic.
| It is not difficult, but it can be very hard and unpleasant.
| Everyone needs to be taught how to process emotions,
| emotionally healthy people are taught this as children.
|
| But to balance this a bit.
|
| You, as a person, are never wrong, but you are still
| accountable for your actions/words. This is an important
| distinction to keep in mind.
| Trufa wrote:
| Eating. I've stressed and binged eaten all my life without
| knowing.
|
| Removed the two, started surfing and 50kg (110 pounds) later I'm
| happier and more active than I've ever been.
| andrelaszlo wrote:
| _How_ did you stop? That sounds like a difficult change to
| make.
| didgeoridoo wrote:
| I had the same problem, and the answer was a bit of therapy
| and a lot of rethinking my mind's relationship to my body.
|
| I used IFS methodology, which encourages you to investigate
| what "part" of you is doing the overeating, and why that part
| seems to think it's necessary (is it protecting you?
| Distracting you?). I don't really buy much of the IFS
| framework, but there's some stuff in there that subjectively
| helped me.
|
| I also suffered from a tendency (probably common here) to
| over-intellectualize things and generally feel disconnected
| from my actual body. Exercise and mindfulness practice helped
| that part.
|
| All those things together helped me feel like I could stop
| fighting my body, and I could find better outlets for my
| furiously running mind than trying to calm it down by eating
| chocolate chips out of the bag at 10pm.
| HDThoreaun wrote:
| New weight loss medication works. Both the big ones are
| showing 20% loss over a year versus 3% with placebo. It's
| crazy expensive, but a lot of the tech workers here could
| afford.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| Like what? I know some do but they are basically just
| suppressing your appetite and speeding up your metabolism.
| Like meth does.
|
| I've used methods to control hunger in the past but
| basically felt like my heart was racing and had hard times
| sleeping when using it.
| HDThoreaun wrote:
| Semaglutide and tirzepatide are the big ones. They are
| appetite suppressants, but they're not stimulants like
| the old "requiem for a dream" style weight loss meds.
| They just make you a lot less hungry.
| dclusin wrote:
| Seniglutide has been getting a lot of press lately.
| Trufa wrote:
| Surf was a great motivator, cause I discoverers i loved it
| and it helps to be skinnier. But I'm kind of the just stop
| doing it kind of guy and this time it just worked. It's
| simple but hard, if you just stop doing it, that's it. I'm no
| weight loss guru tho, just worked for me. Move way more, eat
| way less.
| intrasight wrote:
| STILL struggling with this one - like millions I'm sure. An
| every day struggle. I am trying to reward myself with good
| behavior and enforce "kitchen is closed at 9". My GF only eats
| at three meals. I find it impressive and amazing.
| tashoecraft wrote:
| Wearing modern shoes. As a society, we have somehow led everyone
| down the path that feet must be wrapped in socks that constrict
| the feet, then placed in shoes that are designed for looks and
| not anatomy. It's led to generations of people that have weak
| feet, and unnecessary pain all throughout their body because the
| base of what they stand on has been weakened.
|
| Wearing toe socks and minimalist shoes, combined with going
| barefoot as much as possible, has rescued my feet, ankles, and
| knees from pain.
| rngname22 wrote:
| Just an addendum since HN is so often quick to try new things.
|
| Do not. Do not. Do not jump into jogging with barefoot or
| minimal shoes without a very very slow increase in distance.
| Even if you feel fine and don't notice any pain or problem, or
| your cardio can support you going 5 kilometers, you want to
| very slowly adjust up your distance/time spent doing harder
| exercise with that type of big change in footwear.
|
| Otherwise you can give yourself injuries that can lead to
| short-term or even long-term/permanent complications that
| interfere with your quality of life and physical abilities.
| blamestross wrote:
| I'll add to this. There are situations and people who need
| modern arch support for functional feet, but if you have
| healthy feet, arch support all the time only takes away from
| the muscle strength needed to keep them that way. I've found
| similarly for back support, my back is doing better sitting on
| a yoga pillow or stool (And putting effort into proper posture)
| than any amount of ergonomic back support.
|
| Ergonomic keyboards, on the other hand, are something everyone
| should be using from the start (though we are still figuring
| out how to make them right). Humans evolved to sit and walk,
| but not to keyboard...
| thefaux wrote:
| > arch support all the time only takes away from the muscle
| strength needed to keep them that way
|
| Years ago, I suddenly increased my walking and started having
| horrific pain in my arches. In response, I started wearing
| arch support insoles all the time. If I didn't wear them, my
| arches would ache. Like you said, my foot strength got very
| poor and I eventually suffered a serious injury in my midfoot
| playing basketball. During rehab, I stopped wearing the arch
| supports and eventually moved on to minimalist shoes and my
| feet have gotten dramatically stronger and I never notice
| weakness in my arches anymore.
| ypeterholmes wrote:
| For me wearing superfeet inserts completely fixed my knee
| pain.
| JTbane wrote:
| In a similar vein I found flat-soled shoes like Converse
| sneakers are a dream to wear during daily activities, rather
| than arch-supported shoes.
| jeltz wrote:
| Converse require you to have narrow feet or else they will
| just hurt your feet. They are also not very durable.
| detritus wrote:
| Hrmm, I've long been a fan of thin-soled, low profile shoes,
| but having experienced my first ever pair of Converse just
| last year, I'd suggest 'avoid'.
|
| They're not expensive, but they're certainly not cheap - but
| they certainly don't last very long at all. I walk a couple
| of miles a day to and from work and they barely lasted 6
| weeks. Soles were worn down and the uppers were just
| knackered.
| tashoecraft wrote:
| Definitely a good start. It can be difficult for many to
| transition as you are trying to use muscles that haven't been
| engaged properly for decades.
| alainchabat wrote:
| Having my tongue rest on the bottom of your mouth.
|
| Proper tongue positioning is when you rest your tongue on the
| roof of the mouth and away from the teeth. It's been 2 years I've
| been "mewing"[1]. A good side effect for me: Now I stop snoring
| and I believe I have better posture. Some claim that it will
| improve your jawline but not for me, I guess I started too late.
| If I had started in my teen, I believe I would have had a great
| face today ?
|
| [1] Check youtube videos for "mewing" or lookup JawHacks videos
| machiaweliczny wrote:
| I also wrote about it. It's connected to ,,infantile
| swallowing". Seems like 3-4 year old child should change tongue
| placement but if you have alergy and runny nose then you might
| never learn it.
|
| I suspect that for me it switched back later as I was very good
| in long distance running as kid and after one time beeing sick
| I never recovered to my previous form. It never occured to me
| that it was tongue placement :(
| Nesco wrote:
| "Mewing" is just normal tongue posture. It _will not_ improve
| your jawline. Usually it's the reverse: if you need to "mew" /
| put your tongue on the roof of your mouth consciously and if
| you naturally snores it's _because_ of a problem.
|
| Problem that is often genetic or more rarely that appeared
| during your development: either your face lacks forward
| projection or a part only is recessed (malocclusion: your upper
| and lower teeth don't perfectly fit).
|
| The only way to definitively cure it is to go through an
| orthognatic surgery. If not treated it might evolves into sleep
| apnea as you are getting older. You should check with an
| orthodontist or a maxillo-facial surgeon to make sure that's
| what your are suffering from.
|
| If your are lucky like me, ie you have enough projection and no
| malocclusion, a genioplasty might be sufficient to naturally
| seal your lips without muscle contraction by bringing them
| closer. In my case it's what created the pressure differential
| needed for my tongue to stay in the roof of my mouth. If you
| are unlucky a BSSO, a Lefort I or both (Bimax) might be
| necessary. Some extreme cases might even require the three
| surgeries.
| Llamamoe wrote:
| While genetic/heritable factors play a role, the evidence is
| overwhelming that the main cause is weak jaw muscles and
| improper resting posture during childhood, due to soft diets
| and allergies.
|
| I'd also like to add that even in absence of sleep apnea,
| Upper Airway Resistance Syndrome, where the airway collapses
| but the body partially wakes up before it progresses into an
| apnea, is likely, and often missed by diagnostics.
|
| In general, maxillomandibular advancement is always more
| effective than genioglossus advancement during genio.
| Nesco wrote:
| Thanks for the precision! Bimax indeed best practice but
| performing BSSO comes with significant risk of nerve
| damages.
|
| In my (light) case for example two independant surgeons
| advised me against as the risk outweighed the potential
| benefice
| mijoharas wrote:
| I'd not heard of this and so googled mewing. The first link[0]
| seems to imply that the research into it is somewhat lacking
| (or shows there to be no effect), and that the guy that
| invented it had his license stripped.
|
| I assume now you have anecdotal evidence of it working for you
| for snoring, but what made you think it would work in the first
| place?
|
| [0] https://www.webmd.com/oral-health/what-is-mewing
| fellerts wrote:
| Hard to tell, but I think this is the natural resting spot for
| my tongue. Now I'm curious, where else would you rest it?
| alainchabat wrote:
| The other (incorrect) resting position would be the tip of
| your tongue touching , and not your full tongue.
|
| https://imgur.com/a/0BBXGUz
| Beaver117 wrote:
| Wow, I physically can't do this. I can only touch the tip
| of my tongue to the roof. Guess I need jaw surgery.
| thih9 wrote:
| According to GP, incorrect:
|
| > on the bottom of your mouth
|
| correct:
|
| > when you rest your tongue on the roof of the mouth and away
| from the teeth
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Oh! Another!
|
| Car side mirrors. I spent more than a decade of driving adjusting
| them wrong. You want them so you don't see cars behind you _at
| all_ in your side mirrors until they 're transitioning off the
| edge of your center rear-view mirror. This gives you far more
| coverage of your sides, and every car is still visible in at
| least one mirror at all times. For me, where I put my seat, this
| usually means setting them as far out as they'll go.
| Striykur wrote:
| I often see this technique used to eliminate your blind spot
| since side view mirrors are mainly facing the area where your
| blind spot is. I don't recommend this:
|
| 1. When you set your side mirrors like this you are heavily
| relying on you rear view mirrors to see cars behind/around you
| in the other lanes. However your rear view mirror can easily
| get blocked by people or items sitting in the back of the car
| or large vehicles following closely behind who completely block
| your view of cars in the other lanes (remember side view
| mirrors will only show cars in your blind spot, not cars
| traveling in the other lanes that may be go significantly
| faster than you if you decide to change your lane).
|
| 2. Positioning your mirrors like this does not make all cars
| visible to you if you are on a road with more than 2 lanes and
| so you still must do a blind spot check by physically turning
| your head. This is because on a 3+ lane road and you are in
| lane 1, there may be a car in lane 3 moving into lane 2 while
| you are at the same time moving into lane 2 as well. Having
| your mirrors set so they only watch your blind spot you will
| not see that the car is moving towards the lane you are moving
| to until it's too late. Doing a blind spot check you will be
| able to see a car 2 lanes over is trying to move to the same
| spot you're trying to move to.
|
| I like setting my mirrors so I just barely see the edge of my
| car when I look at the mirror. That way if there is a car
| behind me, their headlights aren't constantly flashing at me
| from the mirror in my peripheral vision until I turn my head
| toward the mirror and then I can see his headlights near the
| edge of my car. I can see cars in the other lane but it doesn't
| show cars in my blind spot (I still do a blind spot check).
| Another plus to this is that it's easier to park backwards. The
| best of both worlds is also having a fisheye mirror on top of
| you regular mirror that shows you your blind spot but this is
| not a substitute for doing a blind spot check!
| yamtaddle wrote:
| It doesn't replace looking around, but does expand how much
| I'm aware of from mirrors alone, a ton. I don't get how
| seeing less is better (though I do adjust them in if
| something's blocking the rear-view, but that's not a normal
| situation).
| Striykur wrote:
| It's a normal situation for me. I might be hauling a couple
| people in my back seats so their heads block the rear view.
| There maybe a semi truck behind me and I need to change
| lanes but they completely block my view out the rear view
| so I will only ever know that there isn't a car in my blind
| spot but won't know if there are cars in the other lane
| traveling significantly faster than me.
|
| It's not about seeing less. It's just the fact that the
| rear view mirror is the most likely to get obstructed. I
| use the rear to mainly get a feel for the amount of traffic
| around me but I try to check it first then my side mirror
| then my blind spot before changing lanes.
| halfnormalform wrote:
| Absolutely! I know what the sides of my car looks like and
| don't need to see them in the side mirrors. Cars leave the edge
| of the rearview and immediately show up on the inside edge of
| the side mirror. I love it, but anyone else who drives my car
| hates it.
| lucb1e wrote:
| That's not what I was taught. It sounds logical but before I
| take an internet stranger's word on changing one of the
| likeliest things in life to kill you or those around you, did
| you read somewhere that this is a good idea based on research
| xyz or is this something you came up with?
| yamtaddle wrote:
| IIRC I read it somewhere long after I learned, tried it, and
| it was so much better I was certain it was correct. All but
| completely eliminated my blind spots (I still turn and look,
| but pretty much never see anything that wasn't already in a
| side mirror, now). Turn them farther in and you're losing
| side visibility to gain redundant rear coverage.
|
| [EDIT] I think I read about it in the context of correcting a
| common misconception or mistake, actually. Correct adjustment
| of the mirrors was described as watching a car leave your
| rearview mirror, and ensuring they show up on your sideview
| just as they're leaving the rearview--so if you can see cars
| on your sideviews before they're starting to slip off the
| edge of your rearview, you've got those adjusted too far in.
| For me, given how far back I put my seat, this ended up
| meaning I should adjust the mirrors all the way out in most
| cars. The idea is both to not have a gap in the
| sideview/rearview coverage, while maximizing side coverage
| within that constraint. So, if you can see cars in your
| sideview while they're still solidly in your rearview, that
| means you've got less side coverage than would be ideal.
| halfnormalform wrote:
| Society of Automotive Engineers, 1995:
| https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-
| papers/content/95...
|
| Referenced in:
| https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15131074/how-to-
| adjus...
|
| (edited to include 2nd link)
| viggity wrote:
| BMW has a performance driving class and they teach the same
| thing - set them far away from your own car. It is a little
| disorienting at first because you kind of don't have a point
| of reference like you would normally, but it is totally worth
| it.
| spcebar wrote:
| I'll add to this that if, while you're parking, you angle your
| mirrors downward, you can easily see your proximity to the
| curb/line
| solarmist wrote:
| Yeah, from your normal driving position, you want to barely see
| your own car. Which is pretty close to all the way out.
|
| Most people's side mirrors are filled with their own car which
| tells you nothing.
| car wrote:
| Realizing that the food we commonly eat, like butter, meat and
| dairy, are the main source of cardiovascular diseases that are
| the prevailing cause of death in our society.
| pcdoodle wrote:
| Elon Musk mentioned the "Elevate the head of your bed by 3"" a
| few months back. Had an open schedule that day so I said "f-it,
| let's go look at my lumber out back".
|
| Long story short, I put a 4x4 (3.5" actual) across the head of
| the box spring and a 2x4" (1.5" actual) across the middle. I have
| been sleeping a whole lot better even since.
| high_byte wrote:
| I just tried this. it does actually feel better already just by
| lying down! can't wait to sleep tonight :)
| pcdoodle wrote:
| Please report back :) I haven't been able to convince anyone
| else to try it.
| anthomtb wrote:
| Proper hand washing. The only good thing about the pandemic. I
| wonder how many colds I could have avoided by spending 20 seconds
| soaping up instead of 2.
| antipotoad wrote:
| To add to this: don't touch your eyes when you've been in
| public places and touched unsanitary surfaces. Your eyes are a
| really easy path into the body for pathogens.
| exogen wrote:
| OK here's a dumb one. You know how the label on EVERY toilet bowl
| cleaner bottle always says "Step 1: flush toilet"? I always
| dutifully followed those instructions, thinking "hmm, the extra
| splashing water must be pretty important and help it mix or
| something."
|
| But no. One day I realized it's just that my toilet always
| started from a flushed state... like a normal person. But they
| knew somewhere out there, someone would try to clean their toilet
| still full of piss and shit.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Step 1: Don't not flush toilet.
| [deleted]
| ajeet_dhaliwal wrote:
| Almost everything.
| christophilus wrote:
| Now I'm curious how you held it!
|
| In my late 30s, I learned that I'd been tying my shoes wrong my
| entire life.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| How to blow my nose. I used to have to find a bathroom to blow my
| nose, because I couldn't figure out how to keep it from going
| everywhere, while still getting it emptied. I just recently
| learned the proper way in my late 40s.
| rrgok wrote:
| So, how is done properly? I cannot blow without blocking one
| nostril.
| lysozyme wrote:
| Tangential to the original question, just want to note that
| having such realizations constantly is one of the primary
| benefits that accrues if you expend the energy to constantly keep
| yourself in a learning/teaching mindset.
|
| The primary global benefit of teaching, in my experience, is that
| it keeps us jaded experts constantly at the entry point to our
| field. Close to the basic, foundational material. Making sure
| that it's easy for new people to join, because that's how the
| field grows and it's good for everyone in it.
|
| The primary local benefit, to the teacher, is that you have
| moments like this that allow you to constantly refine your
| worldview to be more congruent with reality. This allows you to
| better define what should be taught, and how.
| Dowwie wrote:
| One of the worst thing I did for many decades was drink bottled
| water and/or tap water. For many years I bought bottled water for
| home consumption. I eventually learned about under-sink reverse-
| osmosis water filtration systems and invested in one. For the
| last ~15 years, I've used such systems, following scheduled
| filter replacements. The water tastes and feels better than
| bottled water. Last year, my county water utility issued a boiled
| water alert due to high levels of e-coli. This wasn't a problem
| at all for me because of my water filtration system.
| shard wrote:
| Typical reverse osmosis filter systems have to throw away 1x-3x
| the amount of water filtered, which could be quite wasteful
| depending on your water usage. It also removes many minerals
| which some people then have to add back into the water. With
| the water shortage issue in California, I decided to switch to
| just regular undersink water filter as a replacement for
| bottled water instead of reverse osmosis.
| solarmist wrote:
| It could be wasteful if hooked up to the whole house, but
| it's unlikely an under-sink reverse osmosis system will have
| a meaningful impact on your water consumption. Accurately
| identifying where to implement it matters.
|
| If you have hard water, I suggest a whole-house water
| softener and reserve reverse osmosis for the kitchen.
|
| Re: remineralization. Ick, I just skip these. They taste
| awful to me.
| charlieflowers wrote:
| Can you recommend a brand? They are expensive and there are the
| usual low quality, planned obscelesence game playing techniques
| to sort through.
| solarmist wrote:
| AO Smith works well from what I've tried.
|
| > there are the usual low quality, planned obscelesence game
| playing techniques to sort through
|
| Umm, a water filter is mostly a reservoir, tubing, and a pile
| of chemical reactants. This is not planned obsolescence. This
| is just pure chemistry. The reactants become saturated and
| need replacing.
|
| All water filtration systems require periodic changing of
| filters.
|
| That said, there are many stage filtration systems, and you
| don't need most of them. A three-stage reverse osmosis system
| will give you the cleanest water possible. Like mine was a 4
| stage with a final remineralization step that I just didn't
| hook up.
|
| If you want to understand it better watch this [1], just skip
| the deionization step because drinking deionized water is
| very unhealthy.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nb1w15DHO4g
| account42 wrote:
| This depends a lot on where you live. In a lot of places, tap
| water is just fine. In others you might as well be drinking
| from a public swimming pool.
| lucb1e wrote:
| Add country and region for regional advice please.
|
| In the Netherlands and afaik all surrounding countries, this is
| definitely not necessary. Drink tap water all you want.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| I live in France where tap water is considered good and very
| tightly controlled.
|
| You cannot go wrong with tap water.
|
| Now, there is the matter of taste. My tap water is ok, some
| are much better. I drink from a Brita pitcher (the one with
| overpriced filters) and the taste is noticeably better.
|
| But again it is just the taste. The safety of tap water is a
| given here (town halls have to post results from water tests
| that are done on a regular basis).
| Nesco wrote:
| I realised most of my basic health routine was useless to
| detrimental:
|
| - Soap: it disrupt the skin microbiome. Only useful for hand
| washing and to clean private parts / the bottom. Even then use
| high quality soap like Marseille soap or Aleppo soap.
|
| _Note: Also as mentioned in the comments if you avoid soap /
| deodorant you *will* probably need to shower two times a day even
| without doing physical activities. Three times with physical
| activities.
|
| You may also need to particularly rub the smelly parts of the
| body (e.g. the armpits) with a clean sponge, use mild to hot
| water (cold water doesn't do it without soap) and trim your body
| hair. There is no magic. People use soap for a reason: it's more
| "practical" and it requires less care to stay clean
|
| And if you are used to wash yourself with soap and you brutally
| stop you may smell a little the first month until your microbiome
| is able to handle all the waste and your skin to balance its oil
| production. Even if you shower multiple times a day._
|
| - Shampoo: Most shampoos are very a agressive for your scalp /
| hairs and should be avoided. Especially if you have fragile /
| curly hair. You can wash them with plain water or conditioner
| instead.
|
| _Note: Using a gentle shampoo without silicones and surfactants
| can still be useful from time to time. Especially to reset the pH
| of the scalp.
|
| Also using a shampoo rarely and co-washing instead can be
| impractical if you have long hair as it's way harder to clean and
| takes far longer to dry_
|
| - Toothpaste: it can be useful but it's not so important. What
| really is important is to brush your teeth energetically to
| remove by mechanical friction the dental plaques and to change
| toothbrush frequently. Avoiding for a time to use toothpaste and
| using dental plaque revealer can be a great way to learn how to
| properly wash one's teeth
|
| _Note: As someone else noted "energetically" means speed and
| taking your time. *Not* applying pressure on your teeth. Also
| toothpaste helps the teeth by providing fluoride. It's just that
| using it every time may not be so useful and do not replace
| brushing your teeth effectively_
| friedman23 wrote:
| Wow, you managed to convince yourself that something you were
| doing right was wrong
| rieg3c wrote:
| ???
| thepasswordis wrote:
| It sounds like this person previously had a healthy
| relationship with hygiene but has somehow convinced
| themself to just stop cleaning themselves.
|
| Soap and toothpaste are _good_ things. These are miraculous
| modern inventions. Use them.
| hgsgm wrote:
| These are heterodox views about personal hygiene.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| Most conditioners are filled with silicones that are not
| water soluble. But after a while, they break down and make
| your hair look dirty.
|
| The solution is to remove them, but you can only do that by
| using strong solvents.
|
| So you use shampoos that contain strong solvents. This
| damages your hair, so you make sure to use conditioners to
| repair the damage. Except they don't repair, they fill in the
| holes with silicones. The silicones are now deeper into your
| individual hair strands. It looks good, but after a while,
| they break down. So you use solvents, deeper this time.
|
| This damages your hair. Then you use conditioners. Most
| conditioners are filled with silicones that are not water
| soluble. Yet, after a short time...
| jabroni_salad wrote:
| That doesn't mean you shouldn't cowash, it means you should
| upgrade to products that do not have silicone (also
| phosphates). There are various haircare forums that will
| give you the specific ingredients to look out for.
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| I'm not saying you shouldn't wash.
|
| The comment we are commenting under is not even saying
| that but recommending that we pay attention to the
| ingredients: "Most shampoos are very a agressive for your
| scalp [...] Using a gentle shampoo without silicones and
| surfactants"
|
| Here is an interesting web application that allows you to
| scan products to know their ingredients. It tells you if
| they contain hard to remove silicones or harsh solvents.
| https://curlscan.com/
|
| Using it to scan the brands at the stores that are local
| to me reveals that only a small minority of product do
| not contain the silicone-solvent circle.
|
| Anecdotal, sure, but I have been teaching this to all the
| women in my life and they all report back that they are
| able to go longer without washing their hair with
| products now that they pay attention to the ingredients.
| Turns out that for a lot of people, we were going through
| the motion of adding a coat of product and removing that
| coat of product daily instead of actually fighting grime
| and sweat.
| friedman23 wrote:
| I donate my time to help the homeless. I know what people
| that don't use soap smell like.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| The key thing is water. And clean cloths.
| Nesco wrote:
| Exactly. There is a world between "don't use soap on your
| body" and "never shower yourself or change your clothes".
| I often wash myself with water two times per day
| Karawebnetwork wrote:
| You are telling me that you are able to detect by smell
| whether a person is using a conditioner that contains
| silicones?
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| I stopped washing my body with soap 3 years ago. Now I just
| wash my nether region. I also wash my hair once a week. My skin
| isn't dry and scratchy and my hair is strong and silky. Kind of
| amazing that marketing has us all thinking that hygiene means
| soaping everything everyday. Just water will remove most
| things. Soap is to remove oil and fat.
| pc86 wrote:
| I can smell this comment.
| maximus-decimus wrote:
| Why though? What advantage are you getting from avoiding soap
| that would convince people to stop using it?
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| If you sweat and you don't use soap and you don't want to stink
| you need to wash every 4 hours or so. If you don't sweat you
| need to wash every 8 hours or so. Soap adds about 50% to those
| numbers.
|
| If you're not dancing closely with people maybe you can extend
| that time a little bit, but those are the numbers we settled on
| as a dance community who regularly had dances longer than 4
| hours...
| glormph wrote:
| Ha, I learned about no soap on HN some years ago, a HNer
| claiming their lovers thought the no-soap skin smelled great. I
| guess it's likely that other bacterial species may thrive on
| your skin when not washing with soap (soap washing would remove
| more bacteria, only allowing fast-multiplying bacteria to
| repopulate the area, while water-washing would leave more
| different species). Not sure if the microbiome difference is
| better/healthier/nicer smelling. I jumped at the "my lovers
| loved it" recommendation and gave it a try (still used shampoo,
| no success excluding that, washed hands, used deodorant and
| paid extra care to smelly areas), and the armpits definitely
| smelled differently (but hardly like flowers) after a while of
| this practice, __to me__. As pointed out already, that may be
| have been my olfaction getting used to my newly acquired BO,
| like not noticing the smell of your own house, but others'
| houses smell different. My post-training clothes still smelled
| terrible.
| tthbrshthraway wrote:
| > What really is important is to brush your teeth energetically
|
| Potentially bad advice. If you apply too much pressure or use
| too hard of a toothbrush you will get yourself early gum
| recession. Brush gently using a soft brush, ideally electric
| because it cleans better. Lots of info available on this
| online, or ask your dentist.
| Nesco wrote:
| I should have clarified that I meant speed not pressure.
| Applying pressure is indeed a awful for teeth
| altdataseller wrote:
| I heard conflicting info on this. I thought you were not
| supposed to use soap for private parts?
| Nesco wrote:
| Not regularly but before / after intercourses. And for the
| ass usually after each time you need to defecate.
| munbun wrote:
| please use more than just water.
| altdataseller wrote:
| Ha, I do use soap. I just heard somewhere you aren't
| supposed to use any.
| [deleted]
| Lewton wrote:
| Unless you have a vagina, in which case err on the side of
| no soap, unless it becomes a problem (and then buy special
| soap)
| k8sToGo wrote:
| You need to use special soap that has the right pH value.
| Handsoap / shower gel is not the correct one.
| nlh wrote:
| Related discoveries/improvements I've made:
|
| 1) Soap/Shampoo: I stopped using fancy perfumed big-brand
| shampoos (Dial/Dove/Pert/etc. filled with things like
| Methylchloroisothiazolinone which, despite being an endless
| source of literary entertainment, is just a preservative) and
| started using very very simple soaps, like Dr. Bronner's all-
| purpose castile stuff, and I've found my hair/body is just as
| clean and doesn't turn to oil/grease after a skipping one day
|
| 2) Toothpaste: I switched to a brand that does NOT have sodium
| lauryl sulfate (which just makes fake foam) and any minor bumps
| or scratches (from an awkward tortilla chip chomp, for example)
| no longer cause days worth of pain. MAJOR life improvement.
| ahoho wrote:
| These are not universals. I've seen the no-shampoo meme
| repeatedly in online comments. As someone with long, fine hair,
| I've made two attempts to go without, waiting almost a month
| for my scalp to "reset". It always looked extremely greasy
| (like Gary Oldman's character in Slow Horses).
|
| I have had luck opting for gentler shampoos and not using them
| every wash, but I wouldn't speak for anyone else. There is
| large variance in peoples' bodies.
| Nesco wrote:
| I concur that my takes largely depends of my own situation.
| Long hair is tremendously more difficult to wash and takes
| way more time to dry. Just co-washing them is often
| impractical. When I had longer hair I usually used shampoo
| once every two to three days instead of once every two weeks.
| Very gentle ones however
| Bradlinc wrote:
| Same here. Though with a dry shampoo (or corn starch) I have
| found I can make it a few days in between washes.
| boesboes wrote:
| Same, except I get very dry and frizzy hair. I only wash mu
| hair 2 times a week already & tried other crap for months
| with no difference in how shitty my hair is
| marcrosoft wrote:
| I've met a few people in my life that avoid deodorants and
| soaps and claim they don't need them and don't stink. They all
| did. My theory is they get used to their smell after awhile and
| can no longer smell it.
| Pigalowda wrote:
| Yep, they stink and this guy stinks too.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Humanity ignored soap for significant amounts of its
| existence. Nearly everyone stunk. There are likely very very
| few people whose natural body microbiome won't end up
| stinking. You (the reader) are probably not one of those
| people.
| Nesco wrote:
| I indeed tends to get "dirty" and smell faster and I indeed
| feel it. However I wash myself more often. Usually in the
| morning and before bed. After sport sessions also
| ergonaught wrote:
| That is an interesting and seemingly likely explanation. I've
| had this "debate" with entire groups of people who live in
| much cooler environments and claim they don't have body odor,
| but they most assuredly do. I never understood whether they
| "don't stink when they're in their normal environment" or
| just couldn't smell it anymore.
| Pigalowda wrote:
| I recently moved from Texas to seattle. They smell like
| dirt and wet dog as well as traditional musky BO.
|
| They don't smell it because their olfactory neurons have
| habituated.
| muzani wrote:
| I went through a phase of stinking and I can confirm you
| don't realize it. Something in the brain just filters out
| smells that you're used to.
| pcdoodle wrote:
| This is actually something I found myself doing the past few
| years. A good wash cloth and self made products are 1000x
| better than the heavy duty chemicals we put on our bodies
| everyday. I have a rule: If I can't eat it, don't use in
| externally either.
| ericpauley wrote:
| Strong disagree on toothpaste. Toothpaste is more than just a
| physical abrasive, it's also a source of fluoride that makes
| your enamel far more resistant to acid erosion.
| Nesco wrote:
| That's why I said it was useful in the first place. However
| you already get enough fluorides with a moderate use.
| maxlamb wrote:
| I would add flossing on a daily basis to the list. In between
| every single teeth - I missed that part when I was in my 20's
| and now have bone loss in my jaw due to gum disease. Also why
| most old people loose teeth at some point.
| jb1991 wrote:
| Also, oral care is correlated with mortality risks -- the
| more plaque that builds up, the significantly greater chances
| of all-cause mortality:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34575939
| mrguyorama wrote:
| That's one of them correlations innit? People who brush
| less IN GENERAL are less healthy people, but not BECAUSE
| they brush less.
| jb1991 wrote:
| > That's one of them correlations innit?
|
| You might have something meaningful to contribute to the
| discussion, but using a "word" like "innit" is not going
| to get anyone to take your comment seriously.
| notadev wrote:
| Flossing can be sort of boring, so I purchased one of those
| electric water-piks to floss using blasts of water. It's
| similar to the little water gun they use at the dentists. It
| works really well, kinda fun, and makes your mouth feel super
| clean. Can't recommend it enough.
| [deleted]
| nailer wrote:
| > I would add flossing on a daily basis to the list.
|
| As something to do, or something to avoid? Most tribespeople
| and animals don't floss and have healthier teeth than modern
| people. I'm not sure sawing between ones gums is the ideal
| way of removing plaque, and I suspect is not been tested
| properly because I don't believe people actually do floss
| every every day.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| If you are going to compare to tribes people or animals
| then you are going to have to completely avoid refined
| sugar. Which may be more unrealistic than flossing every
| day...
| krsw wrote:
| You also might just die from a infection if you can't a
| root canal. Plus the whole sugar and corn syrup thing.
| nailer wrote:
| Well yes obviously avoid sugary foods that's fairly
| common knowledge.
| maxlamb wrote:
| That was my thinking when I was younger but I was
| definitely wrong. My gums are objectively healthier now
| than back then.
|
| The problem with this comparison is that most tribespeople
| had kids by 18-20 so health issues that come much later
| don't have much of an evolutionary hit. Losing teeth at 40
| was not going to change things much for their genes.
|
| Most tribespeople have diet that basically has no sugar, no
| processed carbs, and most men died by 40-50 due to
| intertribal warfare/infection so it didn't matter much if
| you lose some teeth at 50. When you see documentaries of
| tribespeople almost all the old people have some missing
| teeth. If you don't mind loosing teeth when you get older
| then I guess you can ignore that advice.
| Bhilai wrote:
| > Soap: it disrupt the skin microbiome. Only useful for hand
| washing and to clean private parts / the bottom. Even then use
| high quality soap like Marseille soap or Aleppo soap.
|
| > Shampoo: Most shampoos are very a agressive for your scalp /
| hairs and should be avoided. Especially if you have fragile /
| curly hair. You can wash them with plain water or conditioner
| instead.
|
| Wait, what? I would love to see some supporting evidence for
| all this.
| oDot wrote:
| Not research-backed, but you can google "Curly Girl Method"
| for much of the reasoning, and probably many examples of
| people who avoid shampoos to great success, so it's at least
| true for some.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I think this is an example of overly pushing everything to
| the demand of science.
|
| It obviously depends on your body, diet, and microbiome.
|
| There's no definitive answer like if Earth was balls around
| the Sun. The answer is personal. Does that work for you or
| not? What have you tried and what works and what doesn't
| Lewton wrote:
| I think the problem is that everyone knows "that person"
| who thought they didn't need soap/shampoo etc. but it turns
| out they just have a terrible sense of smell and are
| deluded
|
| Like the friend of mine who told me she never used shampoo
| in which my immediate reaction was "no shit.."
|
| On the flip side, I do have a close friend who admitted he
| only showers every three days or so, and smells impeccable
| (which is extra funny because he has anosmia)
| coldtea wrote:
| https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/04/mounting-data-
| sugges....
|
| Soap is a rather recent invention (the Romans didn't have it
| until later in their Empire), and one that until 1-2
| centuries ago people used sparringly. And yes, they did clean
| themselves with bathing, even in medieval times, despite the
| prevalent myths about those times.
|
| Also, the last 80 years or so, after TV became popular soaps
| and fancy shampoos have been marketed to death with BS
| snakeoil claims. 99% of what you hear in those ads is bogus,
| including claims about the efficacy of their fancy sounding
| ingredients...
|
| Might also want to check the book "Clean"
| owlglass wrote:
| Not research backed, but to add one data point, I bought into
| the whole "I need a three-step skincare routine" trend (which
| I think is positive, people should care for their skin as
| they should any other organ). However, after trying ~5
| different cleansers (varying in ingredients, lathering vs
| non-lathering, and oil cleansing), I realized my acne is best
| when I cleanse twice daily with water.
|
| On the other hand, moisturizing and sunscreen has helped with
| dryness and post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation from acne.
| wazoox wrote:
| Just in case: for many people with acne problems, changing
| the pillowcase daily (or every other day, turning your
| pillow over the second night) seems to make a clear
| difference.
| Nzen wrote:
| I'm going to point at a company and product that I am aware
| of, but have not personally experienced. AOBiome Therapudics
| has a list of its published research, [0], on its website.
| They helped develop the mother dirt body wash product, [1]
| [2].
|
| [0] https://www.aobiome.com/published-articles-and-papers/
|
| [1] https://mightynest.com/shop/bath-body/skin-care/soaps-
| bodywa...
|
| [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20181116064007/https://mother
| dir...
| boesboes wrote:
| You probably stink tbh..
| Nesco wrote:
| Not if you shower yourself multiple times a day, trim your
| body hair and rub the "smelly" parts (ex your armpits) with a
| clean sponge
| axiom92 wrote:
| > until your microbiome is able to handle all the waste / oil
| that your skin produces
|
| Or maybe until _you_ stop noticing the smell? Ask a friend
| perhaps.
| Nesco wrote:
| I indeed did asked friends. They couldn't tell the
| difference. That's why I stocked to it. However I indeed need
| to wash myself more often, especially when the temperature is
| kinda hot
| axiom92 wrote:
| I see. I wonder if you've been phrasing this (tricky)
| question correctly.
|
| For example, if you've been asking "I don't smell bad
| right?? I smell _great_ , right!?" you're unlikely to get
| honest replies.
|
| Reminds me of "The Mom Test" [1]. The book has a few tricks
| that can help with asking tough questions and receiving an
| honest feedback.
|
| [1] https://www.momtestbook.com/
| Nesco wrote:
| I asked friends which I know to be brutally honest as I
| was both skeptical and worried.
|
| And you indeed smell if you don't shower two times a day
| without soap and deodorant.
|
| And even by showering two times a day you _will_ smell
| the first month until the skin regulates its oil
| production and the microbiome is able to handle skin
| wastes.
|
| Great book btw.
| beepbooptheory wrote:
| Is Dr. Bronners a good one?
| thepasswordis wrote:
| No man you definitely need soap.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| If you only shower once a day, you need soap. If you're
| willing to shower multiple times a day, you don't need soap.
| [deleted]
| notadev wrote:
| What would multiple showed a day look like? Morning, post-
| lunch, before bed? How long are the showers and do you use
| any soap at all?
| Nesco wrote:
| I only used soap on my hands and bottom. Usually I shower
| in the morning, then after sport if I am doing a sport
| session and then before going to bed. Showers take far
| less time as you don't use soap, however you need to use
| mild to hot water as cold water won't wash anything
| without soap
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| I shower before any type of socialization (including
| work), and after any type of exercise. That's multiple
| times a day and similar to most westerners.
|
| The big thing some people don't do is shower after work
| before going out for the evening. Women might be able to
| get away with that, but if you're a man and you
| occasionally sweat you can't, soap or not.
| Nesco wrote:
| Exactly: I shower often two times a day. And that is when I
| avoid sport
| secondcoming wrote:
| That's bizarre to me
| francisofascii wrote:
| Wrong in thinking that being a nice guy and always doing what
| women/partner want would make them desire me more. Robert
| glover's book was eye opening.
| xyzelement wrote:
| I used to assume the religious people were missing something and
| missing out on the latest and greatest.
|
| Now I am seeing that often it's us the non-religious that have
| lost something of value and are trying to replace it with things
| that don't work as well.
| joemazerino wrote:
| Amen to that.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Same. I met so many religious people who were smarter, more
| widely read, and wiser than me that my childhood prejudices
| about them had to be drastically re-evaluated, even though my
| fundamental position on the existence of God is unchanged.
| Faith is now on an entirely separate axis from intelligence or
| wisdom for me.
| viggity wrote:
| You've discovered a (large) group of people who have torn down
| Chesterton's Fence without fully appreciating why it was there
| to begin with. Same with people who "smash the
| (patriarchy|capitalism)", they end up extremely discontent to
| realize that other things end up filling the vacuum and they're
| often worse, much worse.
|
| https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Chesterton%27s_Fence
| laura_g wrote:
| There are a lot of things religion provides that modern society
| is really dismal at providing: community, care, socialization
| across class/career lines, relationships with people who live
| near you, a support system for sick/hurting people, and other
| benefits
|
| The thing is, none of those are innately tied to religion.
| We've abandoned churches for what I feel are largely good
| reasons, but we haven't found something else to fill that void
| in community and care. We're more insular, more online, less of
| us know our neighbours or really have a stake in our community
| welfare in the same way. I don't think the solution is going
| back to religion.
| xyzelement wrote:
| Thanks for the response - yes and no.
|
| I think you are right in that _in theory_ you could have
| "all that stuff" sans religion. And in fact I think Atheism
| in the boomer generation benefited from cultural inertia -
| like, you could say you don't belong to a religion but still
| marry, have kids, participate in community etc simply because
| that's what everyone else (by the virtue of their religion)
| was doing around you.
|
| But today it seems like critical mass is elsewhere, and it
| seems like the religious folks now have a huge advantage over
| everyone else in terms of marriage, family formation,
| community and maybe even mental health. So while in theory
| it's possible, it seems like in practice all of those things
| declined among the non-religious, just perhaps with a lag of
| a generation.
|
| The reason I think it might make sense to reengage with
| religion is the crux of this question: does life have a
| point, a meaning, etc. Not even "what" the point is but does
| it exist at all. The idea that the universe is a total
| accident and nothing is relevant takes you in a certain
| direction in life and society, while the idea of "there's
| meaning and purpose" in another.
|
| I think it's hard to anchor your life in the value of meaning
| without logically accepting a creator of that meaning.
|
| So I think there's an element of faith - either you chose to
| believe there's meaning or you chose to believe there isn't,
| everything else is implied by that choice of belief.
| HDThoreaun wrote:
| I really wish I could be religious. I know that the community
| and meaning it provides would bring me a lot of happiness, I
| just can't look past it being untrue.
| Starwatcher2001 wrote:
| You might consider humanism. It provides purpose and
| community, without requiring a deity.
| psychomugs wrote:
| "There is no such thing as not worshipping. Everybody worships.
| The only choice we get is what to worship. And the compelling
| reason for maybe choosing some sort of god or spiritual-type
| thing to worship-be it JC or Allah, be it YHWH or the Wiccan
| Mother Goddess, or the Four Noble Truths, or some inviolable
| set of ethical principles-is that pretty much anything else you
| worship will eat you alive. If you worship money and things, if
| they are where you tap real meaning in life, then you will
| never have enough, never feel you have enough. It's the truth.
| Worship your body and beauty and sexual allure and you will
| always feel ugly. And when time and age start showing, you will
| die a million deaths before they finally grieve you. On one
| level, we all know this stuff already. It's been codified as
| myths, proverbs, cliches, epigrams, parables; the skeleton of
| every great story. The whole trick is keeping the truth up
| front in daily consciousness." - DFW
|
| Academic science resembles religion with its dogmas, nepotism,
| bureaucracies, and favor-currying shibboleths. Deep learning in
| particular is akin to modern alchemy [1].
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7psGHgatGM
| rubicon33 wrote:
| Everyone is always quick to tell you why you need to be
| religious, and I don't even disagree with most of the
| reasons.
|
| What's frustrating is nobody tells you how to reverse a life
| of agnosticism bordering on atheism, and suddenly be
| catholic,Buddhist,etc
| hooverd wrote:
| I prefer the Buddhist interpretation of the afterlife to
| the Catholic one. Hell is temporary vs eternal, and
| contingent on not being a monstrous asshole, not your
| relationship with god.
| svieira wrote:
| Speaking as a Catholic, the eternity of hell is based on
| your willingness to be a monster rather than serve the
| one who is the source of all good. Which is as horrible
| an opinion as one could have.
| DoingSomeThings wrote:
| Further. Religion requires something to assent and belong
| to. That will always be a choice to some degree.
|
| As someone who is formerly deeply Christian and left for
| intellectual/theological reasons. I miss the communal
| binding of organized worship. But reversing or getting back
| to that place requires either 1) letting go of intellectual
| integrity, or 2) finding a group who is similarly
| interested in dispassionate community organizing without
| supernatural theology.
|
| The 1st has proven personally impossible. The 2nd seems
| very unlikely. All the attempts of secular church I have
| seen never pick up steam and trail off over time. Thus, the
| person who sees religious association as a broad good is
| left without a natural landing spot.
| svieira wrote:
| "Suddenly" can only happen with grace. One day at a time,
| one moment at a time, searching for Him until He calls
| "Zacchaeus come down" (Luke 19:1-10) is the only way we can
| dispose ourselves for that moment.
| psychomugs wrote:
| It sounds similar to the hypothetical what-happens-the-day-
| after-capitalism; those who want - or at least don't not
| want - struggle to think of the pragmatics of what it looks
| like.
|
| I wouldn't say I'm a born-again-whatever - I usually
| describe myself as an optimistic spiritual agnostic - but I
| think a combination of broadening my horizons physically
| (geographically moving around) and mentally (actually
| paying attention in grad school to the liberal arts that I
| thumbed my nose at as an undergrad) and getting hit
| repeatedly with how little I/we actually know about
| anything has let me inch away from the cynical
| a(nti)religiosity and submit to something larger than me.
|
| This has also given me a better appreciation of the books I
| (was supposed to have) read in high school; in hindsight, I
| don't think there's any way many students could draw much
| meaning from them without having their own life
| experiences.
| vlunkr wrote:
| As a religious person who has deeply considered leaving it,
| I've never understood the arrogance of some atheists. For me it
| was disturbing to try to internalize the ideas that the
| universe is uncaring, that good and evil are made up, that your
| consciousness is basically like the contents of a stick of RAM
| that will vanish when it loses its power source.
|
| Even the original "God is dead" quotes from Nietzsche sound
| mournful, not arrogant. From what I understand he was trying to
| convey the same thing you are: that by turning away from
| religion, we are undoing many of the basic moral underpinnings
| of our culture. Now we have to rebuild them with something new,
| and quite obviously, people can't agree on one set of ideas.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| > For me it was disturbing to try to internalize the ideas
| that the universe is uncaring, that good and evil are made
| up, that your consciousness is basically like the contents of
| a stick of RAM that will vanish when it loses its power
| source.
|
| How is that arrogant? It seems humble to me to acknowledge
| that I as an individual and a society on the whole don't
| actually mean much.
| vlunkr wrote:
| I'm not saying that accepting those facts is arrogant, but
| that there is a subset of insufferable atheists that try to
| belittle religious people.
| LouisSayers wrote:
| > For me it was disturbing to try to internalize the ideas
| that the universe is uncaring, that good and evil are made
| up, that your consciousness is basically like the contents of
| a stick of RAM that will vanish when it loses its power
| source.
|
| Everyone of us wants to feel significant, loved, and giving
| up on an idea that we live forever, that there's always
| someone external looking out for us etc is an emotionally
| difficult process to go through.
|
| But that's what personal growth is. It doesn't mean that you
| go nuts and do crazy shit - consequences exist. What it means
| is that your perspective changes and you become OK with just
| being you, and taking a journey on a speeding rock through
| space.
|
| People think that you lose when you give up religion, which
| is in part true - but there is also a lot to be gained - in
| personal development, seeing life from a different
| perspective and appreciating the limited time we have before
| donating our atoms back to the universe.
| timeon wrote:
| For me believing in omnipotent and good god seems arrogant as
| well. Is good that some people were born disabled?
| vlunkr wrote:
| Sure, anyone can be arrogant about anything, I'm just
| saying I don't understand it.
| 13415 wrote:
| Just like some atheists need to the corresponding lesson
| about theists, it's worth taking a step back and remind
| yourself that not everybody was raised in a religious way.
|
| Don't forget that to some of us religious stories contain
| nothing of particular interest or are similar to ancient
| fairy tales, and the history of various churches and
| religions is a mere part of the general human history of
| power struggles between elites in various countries. When you
| haven't been raised in religious ways, you feel no guilt
| about making blasphemous remarks and do not fear the wrath of
| supposed supernatural entities.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| Community is the main thing religious provides. But in
| exchange, you typically have to believe in some type of sky
| magician. It's too bad because I enjoyed the community aspect
| of religion growing up but never really was able to buy into
| the sky magician part.
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| I don't think they're missing out. I just think they're
| deluded.
|
| It's not the worst thing in the world to be deluded - and
| frankly I just don't care what they do and say unless it starts
| to impact me and mine. It's not religion per se I dislike -
| people are free to live their lives as they see fit, it's the
| control-structure scam of an organized religion that reels in
| the gullible, the poor, the disadvantages, those who believe
| what they're being told. _That_ is disgusting, IM(ns)HO.
|
| These megapastors (and even not-so-megapastors) bilking their
| flock to pay for the latest Learjet... I think they believe in
| religion as much as I do, tbh.
| ralmidani wrote:
| You're using the most extreme example to condemn essentially
| all organized religion. Many religious scholars and preachers
| live modest lives, sometimes even by choice.
|
| Of course "religious" folks who tell people they should
| simply endure, rather than resist, injustice and inequality
| are disgusting. But sometimes despite your best efforts, the
| bad guys still win (temporarily).
|
| Telling people that this life is not the end-all-be-all is
| only manipulative if it's meant to make people passive. And I
| know that not everyone informs people about the afterlife out
| of malice.
| nerddadnear40 wrote:
| Most of us suffer a kind of nihilism that mankind has never
| really faced before due to modern science. Materialistic
| understanding of the world has broken our ability to recognize
| patterns of being that were once obvious to our ancestors. They
| would find a modern atheist and fundamentalist equally blind in
| these areas as they saw the reality of the world much more
| alive and predictable over vast time periods than we do now and
| they had the language to understand it.
|
| John Vervaeke and the Pageau Brothers are working hard on this
| front. I'd highly recommend John's Meaning Crisis Videos,
| Mathieu Pageau's book on Cosmic Symbolism and Johnathan's
| educational videos.
|
| If you are new to this, it can be a bit mind bending, but it's
| duly needed in our time.
|
| https://www.meaningcrisis.co/all-transcripts/
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIJuIN6kUcU
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Language-Creation-Symbolism-Genesis-C...
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtmLCK1keFI&t=1874s
| hbn wrote:
| I was raised in a Christian community and went to a private
| Christian school all the way until graduation, though really
| stopped believing all the stuff by 11th grade or so. And it's
| wild the parallels I see between the modern political climate
| and religion. It really seems that in the process of masses
| leaving the church, they've gone on to adopt the exact same
| behaviors but worshipping other things - government,
| advertising, virtue signalling to show you're the most "on
| board" with the movement. They've wrapped around to enforcing
| censorship of art and being against free speech just like the
| Christians did when they were in charge.
|
| But I recall most people in the actual church at least had some
| form of a community, and many seemed happy and selfless. This
| modern church that pretends it isn't a church only breeds
| toxicity, selfishness, vitriol, and depression. Everyone is
| holding each other hostage, knowing that if anyone steps out of
| line and questions the status quo they'll be burned in the
| village square as an example to whoever might do it next. The
| actual church community I was in was more accepting in almost
| all regards than this new system.
|
| I honestly wish a lot of these people would just find a normal
| religion. It's way easier to get along with normal religious
| people than the types people being getting hooked on these new
| systems of thought.
| FredPret wrote:
| I think the cat's out of the bag - there's no sky friend
| looking out for us. There's no going back now for most
| people.
|
| This has been replaced by ersatz religions, but I think we
| should start explicitly worshipping the concept of
| civilization and progress. From a certain point of view,
| civilization is a cybernetic organism that encompasses all of
| us and gives us all sorts of neat things.
| titzer wrote:
| > replaced by ersatz religions
|
| There's no doubt about that. Humans have a very strong
| religious bent that is bred into us by evolution selecting
| for motivated, tenacious people who fight to survive but
| whose brains can't stop patterning-matching, perceiving
| threats and agency behind things, and performing rituals.
| Not to mention, organizing around common beliefs. Without
| various sky-friend myths, we organize around other myths.
| Thankfully we have good science now, but that's
| unfortunately often less sexy (and more difficult) than
| pseudo-science and fads.
| throwaway4aday wrote:
| > there's no sky friend looking out for us
|
| That's much too simplistic and isn't going to convince
| anyone of the point you're trying to make.
|
| > his has been replaced by ersatz religions, but I think we
| should start explicitly worshipping the concept of
| civilization and progress
|
| We've done this multiple times before and always with
| disastrous or at least dissipative results. The technical
| term for this is "cult" and more specifically "idolatry".
| There are very good reasons why this has generally been
| proscribed by monotheistic religions.
|
| > civilization is a cybernetic organism that encompasses
| all of us
|
| Saying civilization is cybernetic in that it consists of
| feedback loops that keep it in a stable condition is
| stretching it. Perhaps a nation could be cybernetic since
| it contains a variety of channels through which this
| information can flow in both directions but a civilization
| as a supranational system has some very tight bottlenecks
| that would impede such functioning.
|
| > gives us all sorts of neat things
|
| It does not. People do that and the things are not so much
| given as they are bargained for whether with money or by
| signing on to a social contract or adopting cultural
| values.
| svieira wrote:
| > I think we should start explicitly worshipping the
| concept of civilization and progress
|
| Isn't this exactly what the French Revolution's first wave,
| the Nazis, the Soviets, and the Maoists all did? Or are you
| suggesting something more explicitly Hegelian like the
| religion of "The sign of the T" from _Brave New World_
| (though that religion was focused on production not
| transformation)?
| sovietswag wrote:
| An interesting idea from the Soviet Union:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Building
| svieira wrote:
| "Progress means getting nearer to the place you want to be.
| And if you have taken a wrong turn, then to go forward does
| not get you any nearer. If you are on the wrong road,
| progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the
| right road; and in that case the man who turns back soonest
| is the most progressive man."
|
| ~ C. S. Lewis
| watwut wrote:
| Genuinely, you come across as someone who does not interact
| with non believers and have attitude about them shaped
| primary by hostile media. Starting from assumption that most
| people who left Christianity joined "movement" which seems to
| be mostly euphemism for culture war you are fully into.
| lockhouse wrote:
| Spot on! Science that can't be questioned isn't science it's
| dogma. The whole Dr. Fauci worship culture and "trust the
| science" that emerged during the pandemic felt way too much
| like a religious cult.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| No only are people worshiping dishonest politicians, but
| since radical people don't abandon their ideas, the churches
| have gone through a selection process where all but the most
| radical of them weakened.
|
| We have lost something very important on the conversion of
| our society to laic values. We have gained very important
| things too, so I don't think the best correction is to
| reverse anything, but we have some work to do on those things
| that we lost.
| pjc50 wrote:
| A certain amount of this conformism is human nature .. but a
| lot of people, especially anyone queer, was _rejected_ by the
| church rather than left. I suspect you 're not seeing this
| because you're not in the reject category.
|
| The failure mode of churches (and, yes, some of the more
| optimistic commune arrangements) is toxic positivity:
| everything is great, and anyone who doesn't agree is going to
| be dealt with. This makes it extremely difficult to report
| when someone has been raping adults or children.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| You might like Jordan Peterson's podcast. He talks often
| about the human need to believe in something outside of
| ourselves. This need can be satisfied by many things, not all
| of them good.
|
| Dennis Prager is pretty good on this front too. But, he
| thinks that religion is a necessity for a happy life.
|
| I don't follow any faith. There are too many religions for
| any one to be "correct". But I do see religion as a good
| moral guide, particularly in times of hardship.
| alphabettsy wrote:
| I personally wouldn't recommend listening to either of
| these guys.
|
| Peterson at least attempts to offer balanced. Prager is a
| religious quack.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| Just because somebody believes in a religion doesn't mean
| they have nothing to teach you. As far as I can tell
| through the internet, both are good honest people.
|
| I don't think that it is an overstatement to say that
| Peterson alone has helped millions improve their lives
| through his books, talks, and interviews.
| Lewton wrote:
| This has way more to do with the kind of person who leans
| areligious in a religious society than being areligious
| itself. In a religious society, most normal people will be
| religious
|
| In more atheistic countries, the religious people are the
| ones that are harder to get along with, as normal people are
| a lot less religious.
| hooverd wrote:
| What are "normal religious people"? I think religion is
| really being used as a stand-in for Christian here.
| scns wrote:
| Tribalism is at the core of our species i think. With
| metaphysical "explanations" or scientific ones.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| > It really seems that in the process of masses leaving the
| church, they've gone on to adopt the exact same behaviors but
| worshipping other things - government, advertising, virtue
| signalling to show you're the most "on board" with the
| movement.
|
| _People serve these idols, and many others, to give meaning
| to their lives, to justify their existence. They are afraid
| of death--that is, not only physical death but everything
| which does or seems to militate against life: alienation,
| lack of identity, frustration, pain, meaninglessness. And so
| they grasp, as it were, after aspects of life which seem to
| promise freedom from some form of death, and serve them as
| idols. But what they are really serving is death, for the
| fear of death is the power behind all idolatry. And yet, as
| we have seen, idolatry can only lead to death in one form or
| another, to violence and dehumanization and also to the
| degradation or destruction of what is idolized.
|
| It is a distinctive mark of the biblical mind to discern that
| human history is a drama of death and resurrection and not,
| as religionists of all sorts suppose, a simplistic conflict
| of evil vs. good in an abstract sense. For what is "good" is,
| basically, what is good for man and creation--in other words,
| what is life-giving, life-preserving, life-perfecting. God,
| the Living One, is the author of life, he is on the side of
| life...That which is truly evil is that which thwarts life.
| And sin is any denial or rejection of the gift of life; an
| offense against God who bestows the gift. But the wages of
| sin is death, not by some arbitrary decree on God's part, but
| because sin by its nature is possessed of death, anti-life,
| death-dealing, both to the sinner and in the various kinds of
| death it occasions in the world._
|
| You're probably in the right head space to appreciate
| "Impostors of God: Inquiries Into Favorite Idols" by William
| Stringfellow (1969).
|
| Cryptonomicon is another good one, though far less
| prophetic/scholarly:
|
| _To translate it into UNIX system administration terms
| (Randy 's fundamental metaphor for just about everything),
| the post modern, politically correct atheists were like
| people who had suddenly found themselves in charge of a big
| and unfathomably complex computer system (viz, society) with
| no documentation or instructions of any kind, and so whose
| only way to keep the thing running was to invent and enforce
| certain rules with a kind of neo-Puritanical rigor, because
| they were at a loss to deal with any deviations from what
| they saw as the norm. Whereas people who were wired into a
| church were like UNIX system administrators who, while they
| might not understand everything, at least had some
| documentation, some FAQs and How tos and README files,
| providing some guidance on what to do when things got out of
| whack. They were, in other words, capable of displaying
| adaptability._
| lelanthran wrote:
| Meet the new Puritans, same as the old Puritans.
| alphabettsy wrote:
| > It really seems that in the process of masses leaving the
| church, they've gone on to adopt the exact same behaviors but
| worshipping other things - government, advertising, virtue
| signalling to show you're the most "on board" with the
| movement.
|
| I think that's because these things aren't from church,
| they're part of human nature.
|
| One of the churches I went to as a child was toxic, the other
| wasn't. The religious community isn't immune to human nature.
|
| 50-60 years ago the country was much more religious and you'd
| encounter people saying they'd never let their child marry a
| democrat and vice-versa according to my grandparents. To
| them, things are mostly better and what we have is the
| appearance of greater division.
| titzer wrote:
| > 50-60 years ago the country was much more religious
|
| I think religion adapts and changes; religion was more
| mainstream, less toxic, and uniform than it is now. The
| median person is probably less religious (in terms of
| sticking to an established religion) but the upper 1/3 of
| the spectrum is _more_ religious, in that they believe more
| extreme things, with less evidence, and are less likely to
| compromise. The past 40 years of the evangelical movement,
| which has been coopted by the conservative movement, has
| been extremely polarizing.
| petsfed wrote:
| I'm not sure that it was any less toxic, just that the
| background level of toxicity has decreased.
|
| My mother clearly remembers being called out in front of
| her church for the unforgivable sin of attending a school
| dance, and that was in the mid-60s. Don't forget _why_
| the Southern Baptists broke away from the Baptists.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| > 50-60 years ago the country was much more religious
|
| and 100 years ago, much less! at most 40% of the US
| regularly attended church services in the 1910s.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Could some of that be due to the shift from a rural to
| urban society? If getting to church requires taking a
| horse and buggy 10 miles down dirt roads, then most weeks
| you might have a DIY religious observance at home on the
| farm instead. If you live in a town where you can walk to
| a neighborhood church, you're probably more likely to
| make it a regular habit.
| jlawson wrote:
| I think the 1910 figure might have more to do with
| practical concerns. When you have no car and live on a
| farm far from anything, as a huge number of people did
| back then, you can't regularly get to church even if you
| wanted to. So I wouldn't interpret that number as a clean
| measure of religiosity.
| ralmidani wrote:
| I was born into a Muslim family and have remained a Muslim my
| entire life, but I have had ups and downs in how observant I
| have been. I've had periods where I was less enthusiastic than
| my parents. On the flip side, I've flirted with extremism a few
| times and even started alienating my immediate family members.
| Now, over 40 years old, I feel like I've found the right
| balance: a strong relationship with God, without being seen as
| obnoxious or dangerous. It feels amazing both personally and
| when subtly sharing what I believe is the most important factor
| in having a happy, fulfilling life.
|
| Interestingly, Muslims believe most messengers began their
| missions at or around 40, so maybe everything before is
| "formative years". The one known exception is Jesus Christ,
| whom we believe was raised to God at 33 but still has a huge
| role to play in shaping the world.
| eatsyourtacos wrote:
| The real question is it better to lie to yourself and believe
| in something that is simply not true? Or to be true to yourself
| and deal with the loneliness that is existence.
|
| To me the choice to clear- be true to yourself. In that sense,
| organized religion has no place in this world.
| chasing wrote:
| Not all non-religious people suffer from some kind of spiritual
| or ethical deficiency.
|
| I get saddened when religious storytelling fills people with
| fairy tales and arbitrary hate and makes them incapable of
| seeing things about existence that are truly beautiful.
| username3 wrote:
| What are examples of things about existence that are truly
| beautiful?
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| Not the person who you replied to, however:
|
| I'm not sure exactly how to explain this, but the seemingly
| infinite level of "detail" or "texture" or "complexity" to
| our universe. No matter how small or large you go, there's
| always some patterns, some structures, some details to be
| seen. There's always some other perspective or way of
| grouping and organizing to reveal new information. The
| complexity is infinitely deep, wide and layered. Some of
| that I think is inherent, and some of it is what we create
| as living entities - which is a great privilege we enjoy.
|
| Take a white painted wall made of drywall. Relatively
| uninteresting most of the time. But the potential amount of
| information about it is almost infinite:
|
| * What are all the layers of construction needed to make
| it?
|
| * What did it cost? For every cent of that money, where did
| it eventually go? All of them can be tracked from its
| creation until the end of the currency.
|
| * What people designed the methods to construct it? What
| were their lives like, what led to them doing so?
|
| * What does the surface look like if you were to look at it
| at 10x, 100x, 10,000x, etc. scale? How does all of that
| structure change when it's under pressure? Or wet? Or on
| fire? Or crushed? Or at different temperatures?
|
| * What does it look like as molecules of air bounce off of
| it and it insulates the room?
|
| * What are its physical properties? What does it look like
| in all the different wavelengths of light?
|
| * What is it history, from the retrieval of the materials
| to its final destruction some time in the future? What is
| its eventual fate? Will it be destroyed to make room for a
| newer building? Or in a war? A natural disaster?
|
| * What people were near it? What were they doing and why?
| Office workers? Secretaries? Programmers? Nurses? Was it
| separating people who were friends or hated each other?
|
| * What's the history of the design of the pigment used on
| the wall? What previous pigments did it replace and why?
|
| * If you look at the pattern of bumps and valleys on the
| surface, does it match some existing pattern? What
| mathematical formula would most closely re-create the
| surface variations? What's the closest match to that
| pattern anywhere in the universe, at any scale? Maybe
| there's some sand on a beach or a cluster of stars that
| when viewed from _just_ the right angle matches the pits
| and valleys on the wall.
|
| * What does the surface feel like? Not just for one person,
| but for _all_ humans? If you were to take every single
| human who has ever lived and let them feel the wall, what
| would happen? Which ones would tell jokes? Which ones would
| remember something from their past? Which would have some
| interesting specialist perspective on it? Which ones would
| like it? Hate it? How would they all describe it?
|
| We only have access to a tiny fraction of that information.
| But it's all there! You could spend an eternity studying a
| single blade of grass and it's relation to everything else
| and all of the history. There's always some new abstraction
| or perspective or way to look at everything.
| pm90 wrote:
| Not going to a therapist because of fear of social stigma.
| [deleted]
| prometheus76 wrote:
| This is for people who lift weights. Do you get calluses along
| the pads of your hand, just below your fingers? You are probably
| gripping the bar incorrectly. This also applies to pull-ups/chin-
| ups grip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OK-S3ZJZxQ.
|
| TL;DR: grip the bar across the joint at the bottom of your
| fingers instead of across the middle of your palm. This doesn't
| apply to bench pressing (a push), but applies to all moves that
| involve pulling/lifting the bar.
| hbn wrote:
| I get these from deadlifting. I think I intuitively know what
| he's saying, but I have small hands (for a man of my height),
| and my grip is pretty weak so I'm already using the thinner
| 35lb bar. I do mixed grip, left hand over + right hand under,
| and gripping it the first way adds a bit of friction as the bar
| tries to rotate out of my hand.
|
| I don't know, maybe I'll try this next time I deadlift but I
| feel like it would just weaken my already weak grip.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| Practice hanging from a pull-up bar for time (i.e. practice
| hanging from a pull-up bar for longer and longer periods of
| time, using the grip shown in the video) if you want to build
| up this type of grip. You can also practice by putting bags
| of rice or a gallon of milk (or two) into a bag, then holding
| the handles across your second knuckle for time.
|
| Grip is the main way we interact with the world, so it's
| worth training it. Also, grip strength is the most reliable
| predictor we have found for life expectancy. (i.e. higher
| grip strength means higher life expectancy). It could be
| correlation/causation fallacy, but I have decided to just
| assume it's worth training it for all the other benefits that
| having good grip strength brings.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| I forgot to add in my first response to your comment: it's
| worth learning the hook grip to get that additional
| "friction" you're looking for.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMA2SqaDgG8
| prometheus76 wrote:
| And here's one more video that teaches the hook grip for
| people with small hands:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKQXkZbPzdQ
| dirtyid wrote:
| Good for callus prevention, but probably bad for actual serious
| "pulling". I remember this video from 10+ years ago, when
| powerlifters were still doing the alternate grip for DL. Now
| more or less everyone hooks and depending on hand size, you
| need bar much lower on pads to have extra finger length wrap
| around bar for thumb to securely hook. Smaller the hands the
| lower on palm you need for good hook, every extra mm you get on
| that thumb counts. Which makes a huge different depending on
| bar diameter, typically 25-32mm where women bar thinnest, then
| deadlift bar, men standard, then garbage cheap commercial bars.
| If you have big hands it might not matter much, but
| medium/small hands could be pulling 100s of lbs less. That
| said, it's not dogmatic GOMAD tier of bad advice from Rippetoe,
| this is pretty good advice to get newbies especially women to
| start lifting, along with everyone wearing tights now to
| prevent shin scrapes. Ultimately, if you want to pull weight
| fast, you have to hook and heavy weight over 100s of reps will
| roll in hands and form calluses anyway, IMO best to invest in a
| nice razor pedicure shaver and keep up with hand health.
| sedeki wrote:
| I recently started lifting weights. I just bought gloves. I
| like this tip though - thanks.
| prometheus76 wrote:
| I would highly recommend not using gloves. They reduce the
| feedback you have on the bar and can lead to entrenching bad
| habits with regard to grip. Chalk and the technique in the
| video are a time-tested approach.
| dhd415 wrote:
| In the theme of the OP and by way of response, I've been
| lifting weights for decades but only in the last couple years
| realized that gloves were detrimental to lifting. They add a
| layer of material around the bar that increases its
| circumference and thereby increases the effort required to
| grip it for pulling movements. They reduce your tactile
| connection to the bar which is important for engaging
| secondary muscles in certain lifts (e.g., lats in the
| overhead press) as you progress in strength and for very
| technical lifts such as the clean. The only time hand
| protection may be beneficial is for movements in which your
| hand rotates relative to a bar. That is never the case for a
| (properly performed) barbell exercise but may be the case in
| certain gymnastic movements on a pullup bar and in that case,
| you might consider gymnastics grips.
| automatic6131 wrote:
| Related note, if you lift enough weight - even with this
| technique - you'll still get callouses. But this is good
| nonetheless.
| j_m_b wrote:
| Not sure if I was doing it wrong, but I recently started putting
| the pizza out of the oven and into the frozen pizza box it came
| in. It's much cleaner!
| high_byte wrote:
| my cousin taught me that frying cold pizza in a pan is 1000x
| better than microwaving. I could only think of the hundreds of
| microwaved pizzas I've lost the opportunity to do this to. it's
| even better than when you just order it!
| bruce343434 wrote:
| I can't understand what you're saying, do you not bake the
| pizza and keep it packaged(??) Or do you bake it then put it
| back into packaging(how do you eat it?)
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| Not getting my dog professionally trained.
|
| I spent the money to send him to a proper board and train, and it
| was life changing. Our relationship is better. He is happier and
| less stressed. I was able to take him off sedatives. Plus it's
| cool to have a dog with perfect recall that I can take anywhere
| without worrying.
|
| If you can afford it, I can't recommend finding a reputable
| balanced trainer more highly.
| solarmist wrote:
| This is interesting. What part of the curriculum do you think
| made the difference?
|
| I feel like this would only be half a solution. That, to work
| as a pair, you would need some amount of training as well. To
| better understand your dog's signals to you and know how to
| respond appropriately.
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| > What part of the curriculum made the difference.
|
| I think the big difference is in three parts.
|
| First, they are doing the training all day. I simply don't
| have the time.
|
| Second, the balanced training methodology adds consequences
| as well as rewards. This is a far more effective methodology.
| It is what people use to train working K9s like attack dogs
| and the like.
|
| The last part is mindset. I have a working dog, granted it is
| a Corgi, and he wants to be working. Instead of making him
| "be good," I am giving him jobs throughout the day that
| reward him.
|
| > That, to work as a pair, you would need some amount of
| training as well.
|
| You would be correct. I got pretty significant training the
| day I took him home (about 3 hours). After that, we had a few
| follow hour-long ups. There they show you the commands and
| behaviors the dog learned, how to interpret there body
| language, and how to extend them at home.
| solarmist wrote:
| Sounds great. How did you choose what kind of training to
| do?
|
| Also, what kind of jobs do you give to him?
| FigurativeVoid wrote:
| My partner at the time had lovely dog that was VERY
| scared of other dogs. He would become very aggressive.
| She ended up finding a place in southern Ohio called The
| balanced corner[1]. They seem to do great work.
|
| This inspired me to find a similar place near me. I went
| to a place in Northern Ohio called Boss K9[2].
|
| > Also, what kind of jobs do you give to him?
|
| We try and make everything a job. Our training sessions,
| even place time. Sitting still for a reward is actually
| really hard for a dog, even tiring. So we make that time
| rewarded as well.
|
| This leads to a more structured life for him, which is
| good.
|
| If you are interested in this sort of training, I would
| contact Boss k9. The owner will help you find what to
| look for.
|
| - [1] https://www.facebook.com/haleyhowessoundhounds/
| (sorry, but it only looks like they have facebook?)
|
| - [2] https://www.bossk9cle.com/
| high_byte wrote:
| such a fun thread. I started reading when there were 600
| comments, I only managed to read a few and now there are 900. but
| I'm learning a lot! I even improved my shoe tying skills!
| katspaugh wrote:
| Pronouncing "February" with an r after the b.
| _da_ wrote:
| Either way is correct.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February#Pronunciation
| hbn wrote:
| Not really "wrong" but at some point in the last couple years I
| was using my microwave, putting something in for a minute, and
| for that I've always input 1:00 but suddenly I realized how
| obvious it was that I can just be inputting 60.
|
| As long as you can easily modulo the time, this works for the
| range 1 minute (60) to 1 minute 39 seconds (99). Technically you
| could also do this for times like 2:65 instead of 3:05 but at
| that point you're not saving a keystroke. And on most microwaves
| they have an annoying delay between when you can do another
| keystoke after doing the last one, so I've appreciated the little
| bit of time saving I get with this knowledge.
| Dunedan wrote:
| I prefer simpler microwaves with just two knobs: one for amount
| of power and one for the time. No buttons to press and no
| ambiguous user interface either. Just turn the knobs to the
| desired values and you're done. No buttons to press at all.
| thomastjeffery wrote:
| I sincerely wish I could get a new microwave with a good
| quality digital dial/knob for setting the timer, and a
| popcorn button.
|
| Buttons suck.
| mechanicalpulse wrote:
| Yes! I once had a cheap microwave that only had a timer knob
| on it and I found myself twisting it indiscriminately because
| all I wanted was for it to be on. Being a mechanical timer,
| the resolution wasn't good enough that precise cook times
| were achievable. The power level on that unit was not very
| good, anyway.
|
| I grew to prefer that method of interfacing with a microwave.
| "Just go! I don't care about the cook time!" When my wife and
| I bought our first house and purchased our appliance set, I
| wanted a microwave that did not force me to go through a
| timer workflow. Having such a workflow was good, but I also
| wanted some sort of "on" button on it. We picked out a GE
| Profile unit that had two user-assignable functions on the
| main interface. I assigned a "30s cook" function to one of
| the buttons. This is my "on" button. Additional presses of
| the button append 30s to the timer. This satisfies most of my
| needs.
|
| Unfortunately, when I want to reduce power, the buttons that
| I have to press to do so are not as simple. I start the cook
| via the normal quick 30s button, but then I have to press the
| power button, then have to press the down button several
| times to lower the default power level of 10 to something
| more reasonable like 5 or 3, then I have to press to confirm
| that level. This takes precious seconds -- if it's a
| sensitive item like a small dipping bowl of marinara or
| something, the adjustment may be too late. Sure, I guess I
| could go through the full cook workflow, but that's not how I
| want to interact with it. And you know, if I am expending the
| time and energy to lower the power level from 10, it is
| highly unlikely that 9 will be my desired power level.
| Instead, I wish there was a "halve power level" button on the
| cook screen that cut the active duty cycle in half. So one
| press takes me from PL10 to PL5, another press goes to PL2.5,
| and so forth. Then I'd be happy.
|
| I don't use any of the other features buried in the menus.
| It's all superfluous.
| mabbo wrote:
| The bigger "Why wasn't I doing this sooner" with microwaves is
| using lower power modes.
|
| They don't actually reduce the 'power' of the microwave, but
| they turn it on and then back off again for a proportion of
| time, over and over.
|
| It takes longer to reheat stuff this way, but it comes out much
| more evenly heated, I find.
| derbOac wrote:
| Some do operate in a "true" lower power mode (or at least in
| some mode that's indistinguishable to us). Ours does and it's
| great. But it's the first one I've had that actually does
| that; the rest have operated in lower power mode in the way
| you're describing.
| hammock wrote:
| The ones that have a true low power mode are called
| inverter microwaves and cost like twice as much. They may
| be worth it if you like to defrost food in the micro as it
| prevents the food from cooking
| ansgri wrote:
| They are absolutely worth it! Easy defrosting, uniform
| reheating, less noise, especially if it's a rotation-free
| model like Panasonic NN-DS596B.
| kbuck wrote:
| Panasonic "inverter" microwaves actually do reduce the power
| output. It's one of my favorite features. On power level 1
| you can actually soften butter without melting random pits
| into it.
|
| Unfortunately, at least on my current model, the UX to access
| this feature is very bad: repeatedly pressing the "power"
| button until it reaches the desired level. I've had other
| microwaves where you just key in the desired power after
| pressing "power", and much prefer that method.
|
| I don't know whether Panasonic has licensed this to any other
| manufacturer.
| balfirevic wrote:
| I also have the one from Panasonic, but I'm seeing other
| manufacturers advertise inverter technology on their
| microwaves recently.
| hammock wrote:
| >you can actually soften butter
|
| Ooh that's a good use case. What else do you do with it?
| kbuck wrote:
| Anything dense (e.g. lasagna, meatloaf, etc.) is good for
| a lower power level / more time trade-off. It will end up
| more evenly warm without the edges exploding. I usually
| use power 3 or 4 for these dense dishes.
| throwanem wrote:
| Stir or otherwise rearrange what you're heating every so
| often, too. Microwaves deliver energy mostly to the outside
| of what they're bombarding, so it improves heat distribution
| to mechanically move the heated parts toward the center and
| vice versa - this helps prevent the "burnt outside and still
| cold in the middle" problem.
| haswell wrote:
| And on many microwaves, the "reheat" button is just a guided
| version of a low power mode.
|
| The newer microwaves with a sensor reheat button are pretty
| great.
| com2kid wrote:
| > They don't actually reduce the 'power' of the microwave,
|
| Depends on the microwave, you can get models that do adjust
| the power and they are very nice to use. Being able to slowly
| and evenly heat up food in the microwave is a huge game
| changer when it comes to how you use your microwave.
| xyzelement wrote:
| It's a fun fact that the reason for this was for preparation
| for the introduction of a metric minute composed of 100 seconds
| that was mandated by the government in the 1960s just as the
| first digital controls for home appliances were being
| introduced.
|
| If I recall correctly - 60 imperial seconds are equivalent to
| 100 metric seconds a sort of inverse to the 100 kph being
| equivalent to 60 mph (metric units were mandated on American
| speedometers at the same time)
|
| Of course on the speedometer you can just display both units
| where as on the microwave entry it's more the intention of the
| user that drives interpretation. So they got stuck at 100=60
| and since everyone just interpreted 100 metric seconds as 1:00,
| minute it never caught on but never went away either.
| causi wrote:
| _It 's a fun fact that the reason for this was for
| preparation for the introduction of a metric minute composed
| of 100 seconds that was mandated by the government in the
| 1960s just as the first digital controls for home appliances
| were being introduced._
|
| This sounds like complete nonsense and I can't find any
| evidence of such a "mandated by the government metric time"
| with Google.
| gpderetta wrote:
| I think "imperial second" kind of gives it away.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > It's a fun fact that the reason for this was for
| preparation for the introduction of a metric minute composed
| of 100 seconds that was mandated by the government in the
| 1960s [...] (metric units were mandated on American
| speedometers at the same time)
|
| The Metric Conversion Act was in 1975, not the 1960s, and I
| am fairly sure that a decimalized minute was never part of
| any plans for US metrication anyhow.
|
| This seems like an urban legend where the more likely reason
| is that its a practical design to treat the last two digits
| as seconds abd everything before as minutes, irrespective of
| whether the last two digits are greater than one minute, when
| making a keypad entry system. It bith does what is likely
| intended _and_ avoids needing validation /error reporting
| since every possible numerical entry becomes correct.
| timerol wrote:
| I (almost) exclusively use the "Start (+30 s)" button to set
| time. It's very rare for me to microwave things more than 3
| minutes (6 rapid button presses), I normally do 60 or 90 s. The
| microwave starts going as soon as the first button is hit.
| IgorPartola wrote:
| I do 55 or 66 seconds. Or the +30 button.
|
| Related: hold down 2 on the microwave for a couple of seconds
| to silence all chirps.
| yboris wrote:
| Microwaves are getting better UX these days. The cheap one I
| bought from Walmart about a year ago lets me press `1` and it
| auto-starts a one-minute heating process.
| didgeoridoo wrote:
| Alongside this point, just discovered using the "sensor cook"
| mode on my microwave a few days ago. Apparently it measures the
| humidity coming off the food and adjusts the cooking power and
| time accordingly. One button push and you can walk away,
| confident the food will be heated through but not overcooked.
| Game changer.
| hammock wrote:
| Even easier than typing 60 for one minute is to type 55.
|
| I often type 33, 111, 222, etc for the time saving benefit
| peeters wrote:
| In must microwaves just pressing 1 (and correspondingly 1-5ish)
| and nothing else will start the microwave on high for 1 minute
| at full power. Rather than having to press <timed-cook + 6 + 0
| + start>.
| coldpie wrote:
| 66 is close enough to 60, and lets you just mash the one key :)
| Though I just mash the +30 seconds button until it gets in the
| ballpark, and it turns on the microwave immediately with the
| first press. 15 seconds either way isn't going to make a
| difference, and I usually pull it early anyway once it starts
| to smell/sound/look cooked.
| mhb wrote:
| Hmm. Maybe there's more opportunity for you to optimize even a
| bit more. On my (cheap) microwave, I can push 1 through 6 and
| it just goes for that number of minutes. And pushing Start adds
| 30 seconds. More resolution is seldom needed.
| cloudripper wrote:
| Walking.
|
| Currently in my late 30s, I've long enjoyed pushing my limits in
| many forms of physical exertion - running, climbing, skiing,
| mountain biking, etc. However, as I've aged and my bones are no
| longer made of rubber, I have been forced to realize that pain is
| not often gain.
|
| Dealing with the many persistent aches and pains, I was prompted
| by a friend to get a 'gait analysis' to assist with my running
| longer distances and in more diverse terrain. I quickly learned
| from my very skillful physical therapist/gait analyst, that my
| gait for running is not sustainable- and will lead to kinks and
| pains as I progress. Taking a step back, she identified that many
| of those gait quirks stem from my walking gait. And she quickly
| identified that my walking gait is out-of-wack due to an injury I
| sustained while playing basketball when I was 13.
|
| 25 years later, I am challenged to learn how to walk correctly..
| so the question I have is if I haven't yet learned to walk, have
| I really ever been able to run? I doubt it, but I'm a pretty firm
| believer that I will be able to in the future.
|
| Edit: I can't spelle
| beznet wrote:
| I used to have a very large stride and was always known as a
| fast walker. Started having hip/back pain and reassessed how I
| move entirely and realized my long strides meant my hip and
| lower back shifted dramatically with each step to give my leg
| extra reach. Got minimalist shoes to where I don't heel strike
| as significantly and its reduced my stride length quite a bit
| thus removing that excess rotation in my hip and lower back
| prakashk wrote:
| Do you, by any chance, mean to say "gait" analysis, instead of
| "gate" analysis?
|
| If not, can you please explain what "gate analysis" is?
| z7 wrote:
| I don't know to what extent it's wrong, but I've been drinking
| tap water for years. Here in Germany it's generally said to be of
| high quality, but apparently 1 litre contains 100 nanograms of
| hormones (via birth control medication).[1] Even at such
| concentrations the hormones are said to have an effect (the
| article quotes a professor for membrane technology and describes
| a new filtering process aiming to solve this issue).
|
| [1] https://www.nationalgeographic.de/umwelt/2022/03/hormone-
| im-...
| tbonesteaks wrote:
| We live in the US, in an old house and generally the tap isn't
| good. But, in combination with the old pipes, it was gross. I
| have a friend who is a pipe fitter, and he told me "Poison
| kills you quickly. Bad pipes do it slowly." So, we got a Berkey
| Walter Filter [1] and it's great. They are heavy duty and
| apparently it even alkalizes the water.
|
| [1] https://www.berkeyfilters.com/
| thn-gap wrote:
| Not telling my friends that I love them.
|
| I was 28 the first time a friend told me "I love you" in a pure
| friendship way (and while sober), and without being a part of a
| special situation. I've also done it afterwards, and because I
| had never told my friend i love them, it made the message even
| stronger.
|
| It feels wrong that we don't do this more often.
| RobertRoberts wrote:
| I recently remembered to tell my kids "I like hanging out with
| you" or "this was nice being with you today". I did it a while
| back when I had a realization that my parents didn't like
| spending time with me and I didn't want my kids to feel that.
| But then I forgot for a time...
| nlh wrote:
| This is truly wonderful. I do the same (even if it's sometimes
| just "love ya man").
| bckr wrote:
| The difference in feeling between "I love you", "love you",
| "love you guys", "love ya", "all my love", "much love" is
| actually striking.
| intrasight wrote:
| Same. But specifically not initiating. I had a couple friends
| from way back who would say that and I would respond in kind.
| My change, later in life, was to be the first to say it - and
| with any good friend. For me the change was to be in a friend
| group of mostly women - who are generally more likely to share
| their feelings.
|
| Share the love.
| lame-robot-hoax wrote:
| I don't feel comfortable telling people I love them outside of
| a serious relationship, so this always makes me feel a touch
| weird.
|
| Like, my best friends, I love them in a sense I guess...but I
| wouldn't say that. It just doesn't feel natural to me. I'd
| characterize our relationship as close, and that I care about
| them a lot, but "love" isn't something that comes to mind
| outside of my parents or someone I've been in a long term
| relationship with.
|
| I'm not sure why. Maybe it has to do with being an only child.
| Maybe it has to do with all my grandparents dying when I was
| young, and not being that close with extended family, so there
| was never really anyone to love outside of my parents for the
| vast majority of my life prior to any long term relationships.
| kojeovo wrote:
| Try it :)
| justin_oaks wrote:
| It's unfortunate that English doesn't have enough words for
| different kinds of love: lustful "love", romantic love,
| brotherly love, general love of humankind, appreciation for
| non-human things (e.g. I love these shoes!), different words
| for levels of love (e.g. between "like" and "love"), etc.
|
| Instead they're all lumped into "love". Ugh.
| geocrasher wrote:
| You need to understand that expressing love, and being _in_
| love are separate things. Saying "I love you" to one of your
| buddies doesn't mean you're lusting after them, just that you
| care about them in a deeper way. I still struggle with it,
| but I say "I love you, brutha!" or "love you, dude!"
|
| I'm also an only child. I wasn't told "I love you", I was
| told "shut up". Being able to say "I love you" to somebody in
| the context we're discussing has been a game changer for me.
| It's just so freeing.
| lame-robot-hoax wrote:
| I mean I very much understand the difference, as I said in
| my original comment, I don't just see love as an intimate
| thing with a partner, but as a way to express love
| to...well...loved ones. Like parents or family. I guess I
| just have for the vast majority of my life only associated
| with expressing love and caring via saying "love you" to my
| parents, that it feels as if it's almost reserved for them.
| And then of course the "in love" meaning is reserved for a
| relationship.
|
| Like, even when I'm around extended family that says love
| you, I just feel awkward and almost forced to respond with
| love you too back to them. Like I care for them of
| course...but I would never say I love you to one of them
| without them saying it to me first.
| solarmist wrote:
| I have reframed how I interpret feeling awkward because
| of things like this.
|
| Awkward is the feeling of trying something new (a form of
| play). Similar to giddiness.
|
| Like trying out a new style of clothing, it's just the
| feeling of a new experience.
|
| It's an intense sensation because we don't allow
| ourselves to feel as adults and assume it means I did
| something wrong/bad. No, it's just the experience of
| doing something different than you've always done. The
| context can tell you if it is problematic, but usually,
| it isn't something others notice.
| halkony wrote:
| I like this perspective. Sometimes I notice that the
| people I value aren't quite ready to hear it from me.
|
| When that happens, a funny thought pops into my head --
| love is a four letter word.
| caxco93 wrote:
| I guess spanish made this easier with 2 separate verbs.
|
| You can say "te amo" to your significant other and "te
| quiero" to your friends and family.
| e40 wrote:
| I completely agree. It wasn't until my best friend got terminal
| cancer that we started saying it.
| tombert wrote:
| I too kind of hold my pencil "wrong" when I write. I tend to rest
| my wrist on the paper, which leads to smudging of the text and
| graphite building up on my hands.
|
| I never really learned a better way; I am just a really fast
| typist now and I type everything.
| Tarsul wrote:
| I actually went up stairs up until my 20s always while holding my
| breath. Sometimes wondering why it's so exhausting.
| spcebar wrote:
| When/why did you start doing this and when did you realize it
| wasn't normal?
| [deleted]
| LVB wrote:
| Not using a bidet.
|
| I was enlightened the first time I traveled to Japan, and an
| affordable ($50) add-on has been installed in our master bath
| ever since.
| intrasight wrote:
| My current toilet has a sink besides it. Wet TP does
| equivalent. But in my new house, the sink is not within
| reaching distance. I am considering an add-on.
| wingerlang wrote:
| Wet TP is by no means equivalent to a bidet (or spray-hose-
| thingy, as we have where I live). It is worlds better than
| dry TP, still.
| alainchabat wrote:
| which $50 one do you recommend?
| qorrect wrote:
| $34.
|
| I've recently switched to the handheld ones because the seat
| attachments require you to shift your butt around to catch
| the stream. Friends seem to be more weirded out by this one
| though.
|
| https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B076G9M9JG/
| LVB wrote:
| Haven't looked in a long time, but I've had this one for
| almost 10 years with no issues:
| https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00A0RHSJO (only $35).
| pancrufty wrote:
| All hail the bidet. Even the European-style bidet is kind of an
| inconvenient waste because you're still supposed to use plenty
| of paper before moving onto it. In Asia you use toilet paper
| only to dry.
|
| The Japanese one is nice but the one common across South East
| Asia is the best because it doubles as a bowl cleaner: No need
| for a toilet brush.
| biztos wrote:
| At least in Thailand, Western foreigners call this a "bum
| gun."
| nlh wrote:
| +1000000
|
| I used to think bidets were weird European things.
|
| Now I know that wiping your dry poopy butt with paper is a
| weird American thing :)
|
| Bidets for life!
| bckr wrote:
| A weird American thing that caught on because bidets were
| considered "sinful"!
| deeteecee wrote:
| I mean, if you eat healthy, your poop comes out pretty
| clean is my understanding. But we Americans certainly can't
| make that argument :)
| qorrect wrote:
| He said sinful, what did you think he said :D ?
| bckr wrote:
| I think it depends more on your gut flora than anything
| else.
| trinsic2 wrote:
| I realized that blaming the The world and other people for my
| misery was a waste of my life.
|
| http://scottrlarson.com/books/book-most-improved/
| achenatx wrote:
| Ive modestly tried to lose weight my whole life. Ive never been
| fat, but still had to work to keep my calories low. Im 5' 9", and
| it took 10 years to go from 170 to more like 160. Losing weight
| made me weaker and caused me to lose muscle.
|
| Ive recently started weightlifting for strength (low reps high
| weights) and the mindset is totally different. With weightlifting
| to keep your lifts going up you have to eat more. One standard is
| 1g protein/pound of target body weight. It turns out it is really
| hard to eat that much protein and when you do you arent that
| hungry. Im now trying to gain weight to get up to 190-200. Ive
| gained 10 pounds back to 170, but it is more muscle than fat.
|
| In the end weight is just a meaningless number and building
| muscle becomes a positive spiral. Losing weight causes a loss in
| muscle which becomes a negative spiral.
|
| Paradoxically you can be leaner, look better, and be stronger at
| a higher weight.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| That's not really that great advice - overdosing on protein
| long term will mess up your body in number of ways. Yes
| beginners always fixate themselves on this specific aspect (or
| very similar formula) but it ain't good path to sustainable
| wellness and health.
|
| Let's put aside the super tiny category of professional
| bodybuilders where its valid approach, which ain't long term
| healthy place to be in for number of reasons.
|
| For most folks doing heavy lifting, normal healthy diet is more
| than enough, if you get 60-100g of complete proteins in your
| body, mostly from real food and not just protein powder. You
| _will_ grow muscles hard depending on the load, genes, active
| rest and billion other factors. At certain point (quite far
| from beginning) you should stop increasing weights, because you
| are removing health benefits more than adding by working out by
| entering joints / connective tissue injury territory.
|
| The best is some place in between, just like with everything
| else in life. Do some heavy lifting if health allows it -
| ideally compound free weights (initially with trainer
| supervision to avoid mistakes that mess up your joints over
| time), do some cardio, HIIT, get into real sports out there and
| physical activities that become your passion and you stop
| caring about chasing meaningless weightlifting numbers.
|
| The best side effect of all this is you start thinking much
| more what you eat, how much and how often. _That_ is the key to
| good health, good weight and overall setup that can last you
| well into retirement.
| gpt5 wrote:
| It's funny that the OP recommended taking 77g of proteins per
| day (1g per kg for a 170lbs person), while you say that he is
| recommending too much protein, then proceeding to recommend
| 60-100g.
|
| Edit: I mixed the units.
| frogulis wrote:
| OP recommended 1g/pound which is more than double that 77g
| for a 170lb person. Not saying that the comment you
| responded to is necessarily right, but they were talking
| about significantly higher amounts of protein than you.
| chordalkeyboard wrote:
| > overdosing on protein long term will mess up your body in
| number of ways
|
| 1g protein per pound of lean bodyweight is not an 'overdose'
| and has no ill effects, long term or otherwise.
|
| the rest of your comment is good advice.
| 015a wrote:
| Any advice/links on getting started lifting?
| the_doctah wrote:
| Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe is what you will see
| recommended the most often
| DantesKite wrote:
| If you have iOS, I highly recommend the Fitbod app. I've
| tried so many other apps and I just end up doing all this
| tedious logging that gets frustrating. But Fitbod just
| outsources all that away to its machine learning backend.
|
| It uses an algorithm to maximize your strength gains and uses
| the equipment you have at home (or the gym). So even if you
| only have a few pieces of equipment, it can still create a
| diverse workout for you.
|
| And it has videos for how to do each exercise, which comes in
| handy more than you might expect.
|
| I like it because I don't have to keep track of anything,
| don't have to do any work in terms of number crunching.
|
| It's like having a smart personal coach.
| mcnnowak wrote:
| Generally my advice when people ask me is as follows:
|
| 1. In the beginning, going to the gym is the hardest part.
| Incentive: if you go to the gym consistently for a while you
| are rewarded with no more post workout muscle soreness, and
| easy newbie gains.
|
| 2. Do compound lifts if you can (squat, bench, deadlift
| (warning deadlifts are not for everyone, and may not be all
| that beneficial), pullups/pulldowns.) Add a bit of weight or
| reps each week. Aim for 3-6 sets. No one will care if you
| start with an empty bar. If you add reps, if you get up to
| around 10-12, add weight instead. These number are flexible
| and there is no right answer.
|
| 3. For accessory exercises or things that target single
| muscles: try a bunch of stuff and try new stuff often. If you
| don't like it, don't do it. If you like it, work it into your
| routine. These are generally fun but unnecessary until you
| hit a plateau/wall in another lift and do some research on
| what you want to do to get past that plateau/wall.
|
| 4. Good form is more important than adding weight. Don't hurt
| yourself.
|
| 5/Bonus. Try watching some cringey YouTube fitness
| influencers and see if they're doing anything that looks fun
| and try that.
|
| Also follow the golden rule: clean up and put your damn
| weights back.
| tstrimple wrote:
| I'm pretty sure the deadlift comment would get you into
| fights in most gyms with power lifters. I'm curious where
| you have seen that they aren't beneficial? Everything I've
| read about them puts them firmly into the "best exercises"
| category.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| Not OP but I would add - keep some kind of written record
| of your progress - it can be very motivating to look back
| and see eg. I went 3 days per week for the last 3 weeks, or
| 3 months ago I could lift X, now I can lift X+30
| fknorangesite wrote:
| The /r/fitness wiki is a surprisingly good resource for
| beginners: https://thefitness.wiki/
| danial wrote:
| https://www.amazon.com/Starting-Strength-Basic-Barbell-
| Train...
| ancientworldnow wrote:
| The standard is 1g per kg but American lifters got confused and
| repeat it ad nauseum online until it became heterodox.
| jakesgates wrote:
| I started lifting within the past couple years and focused on
| high protein intake, I found very quickly that if you are
| trying hard throughout the day to hit 130g+ of protein, there
| isn't much room to be craving other things. And when I did
| crave something sweet or unhealthy, I basically told myself
| that if I first have my big protein shake, and then if I still
| feel the desire to eat that thing, then I could eat it. But
| only after having a shake... and most of the time you are so
| full from the shake or protein bar that you don't care for that
| desert anymore anyways.
| Overtonwindow wrote:
| Thinking that most people have good intentions.
| loa_in_ wrote:
| Even if they say they have your best interest in mind, they
| might not, or they might be misinformed about you and act on
| un-truths. Either way it can be very detrimental.
| dandanua wrote:
| Most people just follow the trend. But there are leaders that
| promote the worst in people. And they have a huge part of
| attention nowadays.
| muzani wrote:
| I saw a documentary once where a cop said that 10% always have
| bad intentions, 10% always have good intentions, and 80% are
| situational. We don't normally encounter the ones with constant
| bad intentions because most end up in prison.
|
| But it stuck with me because my father was always around really
| nice people and I realised he faced the opposite of the prison
| effect. If you're consistently nice to people, you end up in
| the crowd of people with better intentions. It's a selection
| bias.
| tarotuser wrote:
| The 10% bad and 10% good is also a strong proxy for
| poverty/plenty. Desperate people do desperate things.
|
| Also, be careful how you assign "bad". It can either be
| unethical or illegal, as they are not the same thing.
| muzani wrote:
| Poverty/plenty is in the 80%.
|
| Bad means someone who would molest a child because it's a
| new experience or run over a stranger with a car. A
| business owner who is _proud_ that the people he hires don
| 't make enough money to eat.
|
| Hitmen who consider the people they kill as rats so they
| don't get emotional scarred by the murder - they're in the
| 80%. A tyrant who orders a city pillaged and raped to
| assert dominance, also in the 80%.
| ChicagoBoy11 wrote:
| If you want to do a marvelous deep dive on this concept, I
| highly recommend the Evolution of Cooperation by Robert
| Axelrod. It's a masterful work on the game theory behind how
| different species/animals/people cooperate and why, and it is
| a deeply intellectual and rigorous book that uses no more
| than 6th grade algebra to get its point across. Promise you
| you'll like it.
| bombolo wrote:
| If a cop said it, I'm just going to assume it's false.
|
| Bad people don't end up in prison, not for the most part. Bad
| intention and crime aren't the same thing.
| high_byte wrote:
| not everyone in prison. many are smart, cautious and/or
| experienced. I would even say most are not while most people
| in prison are not "always bad" but situational.
| muzani wrote:
| Not everyone in prison is bad and not everyone bad ends up
| in prison.
|
| But it got me thinking that there are people out there who
| will stab you just for disagreeing with them. We don't
| encounter them often because nearly all the people who
| can't control themselves end up in prison. It's dangerous
| to assume that people will always act in their own best
| interest.
| nrclark wrote:
| I think it's a good practice to assume that people have
| good/average intentions. Nobody is the villain in the story
| they tell themselves. I get farther in life with this
| philosophy:
|
| Nobody is out to get me. Also, it's a C+ world out there, with
| a lot of incompetent people.
|
| Be smart, and be very careful about whether you trust somebody
| to deliver the outcome that you want. But if they mess it up,
| come up with some reasons other than "so-and-so is evil" or
| "so-and-so hates me". It'll help your state of mind, and also
| your interactions with them.
| themandalorian wrote:
| i'm the opposite, how to balance it?
| GoToRO wrote:
| Put a person in debt for 30+ years so that he has to deliver
| (most of the time they fake it) and see how toxic that person
| becomes. I see a lot of managers beeing trapped and
| replaceable. They are the most toxic people. They will do
| anything not to loose that job because the bank will take their
| home. Developers are not much better, but the culture is set by
| managers.
| Jommi wrote:
| you should always assume this, otherwise you just sign yourself
| up to play a losing game for the rest of your life
| mooreds wrote:
| I used to always cut open packages in the kitchen with a sharp
| knife (typically a steak knife). When I got married, my SO was a
| big fan of kitchen shears, so I was introduced to them.
|
| Using shears is a far better experience, and they're useful for
| pizza too.
| bruce343434 wrote:
| An actual pizza knife (sharp wheel thingy) will be undoubtedly
| better.
| mooreds wrote:
| I've used the sharp wheel thingy (didn't know it was called a
| pizza knife) in the past. It's nice but only good for that
| one purpose.
|
| Kitchen shears are far better than a regular knife because
| they give you a lot more control, it's easy to cut different
| sized pieces. Plus, shears are useful for other things too
| (butterflying a chicken, for example).
| tome wrote:
| Definitely not! Cutting pizza with scissors/kitchen shears is
| far more effective. I'd never cut home-cooked pizza with a
| wheel if I had my way. Unfortunately it tends to upset
| Italians and other sticklers for tradition.
| bruce343434 wrote:
| I can only imagine the cheese layer getting plaqued onto
| the shears.
| Leftium wrote:
| Try a Slice micro ceramic blade!
| https://www.sliceproducts.com/products/safety-cutter
| cookie_monsta wrote:
| Kitchen shears are also great for cutting meat into strips for
| stir fry.
|
| Please don't judge me. I'm just trying to get by.
| w_for_wumbo wrote:
| Thinking other people's emotions were my responsibility (or
| likewise that other people were responsible for my emotions). I
| can control my actions and that is all. If someone reacts
| negatively, it's not my fault, and it's not my responsibility. I
| may choose to help them through it, but at the end of the day, I
| can't, nor should I want to control other people's emotions.
| colinsane wrote:
| when regulating temperature, the body does better at heating than
| cooling: i sleep better and all the way through the night with a
| wool blanket @ 10C than with thin sheets @ 20C.
| intrasight wrote:
| When I was about 12, I sprained my thumb and started holding
| pencils very differently because my thumb was in a splint. It
| took decades to go back to the right way.
| f3b5 wrote:
| Not waking up earlier to the fact that the meat section in the
| supermarket is a product of systemic, gruesome torture of
| intelligent beings. Like probably many of you who read this, I
| usually felt a bit guilty when I was confronted with the ugly
| facts we are all vaguely familiar with. I justified my meat
| consumption with specieist arguments (humans are so much better
| than pigs, cows, etc). My wife challenged me to watch at least a
| little bit of a documentary, and if I still wanted to eat salami,
| so be it. Afterwards I didn't want to eat salami anymore. I now
| think that the extreme abuse of animals by the food industry on
| behalf of ignorant consumers is probably the worst evil of the
| 21st century. If you disagree, I challenge you - watch 15min and
| then post your reply: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LQRAfJyEsko
| orange_fritter wrote:
| I think the "aha" moment was when I was thinking silently about
| how great this veggie wrap was, and someone expressed disgust.
| They said nothing compares to a meatball sub, and I realized
| that my palate had changed because I used to feel the same way.
| Like if you don't hork down a big chunk of meat, your meal is
| incomplete. But deliberate effort to be healthy and moral had
| changed my taste buds and gut. The sacrifice is not as big as
| you think. As for me, I will still eat a steak if I really
| crave it, but I typically feel heavy/slow afterward and it's
| just not as good as they say.
| high_byte wrote:
| you would probably love Cowspiracy and the less gruesome and
| more wholesome The Game Changers. both on Netflix.
| jmkr wrote:
| A few minutes of skipping around Dominion for me too.
|
| > I now think that the extreme abuse of animals by the food
| industry on behalf of ignorant consumers is probably the worst
| evil of the 21st century.
|
| I agree, there's no comparison, billions of land animals a
| year, trillions including sea life. I can't count that high.
|
| The pain has gotten worse year after year. You watch otherwise
| smart people give bad arguments, or complete ignorance. To
| maintain any kind of social life you have to deal with being
| uncomfortable with those around you.
|
| Hopefully we can have small impactful moments upon other's
| lives.
| lumb63 wrote:
| My stock response to assertions that eating meat is cruel:
| plants feel too. Many species are self-aware every bit as much
| as animals are. It's only because wheat and corn don't have big
| googly eyes that we feel no sympathy for them. Implicit in the
| act of consumption is the notion that our lives are worth more
| than the lives of whatever we eat.
| mahogany wrote:
| Even if it's true that plants feel and suffer, the pipeline
| of plants -> livestock -> food still kills many (an order of
| magnitude at least) more plants than the direct pipeline of
| plants -> food, so eating animals still causes more overall
| suffering.
|
| In that sense, it seems to me that a plant-based diet is
| still the preferable choice if one wants to reduce
| unnecessary suffering.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| Curious, do you still eat meat? And if you do, do you prefer
| small farm butchers?
| f3b5 wrote:
| No I'm completely vegan by now (though I was vegetarian for a
| long time because cheese had a strong hold on me). Regarding
| small butchers / organic farms: a long time ago, I spent two
| days at a tiny organic farm that was run by a local
| politician of a European Greens party. By meat industry
| standards, this farm was an absolute animal paradise. I
| helped around the farm, including with slaughtering a pig. My
| job as the guy from the city was to just herd it into the
| kill room. The pig seemed intelligent to me, it was confused
| and didn't want to die. A crew of men dressed in wifebeaters
| stunned the pig with an electroshocker, lifted it up with a
| chain, sliced its arteries to let it bleed out, all while
| cheerfully drinking beer. They made crude remarks while blood
| and guts was spilling everywhere. Needless to say, there was
| way more chopping to be done after that. The scene had a
| surreal quality to me - what had just been alive a moment ago
| was now dangling in halves in front of me like in a horror
| movie. The pig probably didn't suffer, but the experience
| still felt deeply wrong to me. But here's the kicker: even
| after this close-up slaughter experience I still continued to
| eat meat for years, because I just was so used to it. Back in
| the city, in the gleaming supermarket, meat again stopped
| being something that lived, and was again a yummy product to
| buy.
|
| Long story short: even the best farm and the best butcher
| (which are getting exceedingly rare) are still using,
| abusing, and ultimately killing intelligent beings. This also
| does something to the people that do the killing:
| https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-50986683
| muzani wrote:
| Pasta and sauce are not meant to be separate. Once you cook the
| pasta, drain it, and immediately toss with the sauce. This is
| part of the reason it was meant to be al dente, to absorb and
| deliver the flavor of the sauce better. Unlike rice, it's fine to
| "soak" pasta in the sauce; it expands when freshly cooked but not
| when cool.
|
| Also most sauce recipes are probably overcomplicated. Most need
| less than 5 ingredients. You probably don't need all that onion
| and garlic, but one of them. Definitely not two tablespoons of
| dried oregano.
|
| The way you cut onions and garlic changes the flavor a lot too.
| Finely minced garlic, from a food processor or garlic press can
| be overpowering yet not deliver the flavor. One trick is to crush
| the garlic and let the oil it's in carry the flavor. Half an
| onion can work really well in a sauce you cooking for half an
| hour.
| 2-718-281-828 wrote:
| and the secret spice of any sauce is ... sugar. yes, I'm very
| sorry. thank me later
| cabalamat wrote:
| > Unlike rice, it's fine to "soak" pasta in the sauce
|
| Why is this bad with rice? When I make a stew I often put some
| rice in, with the expectation that the rice will absorb some of
| the stew.
| jerf wrote:
| Rice can almost fully disintegrate if left in water, and will
| become something that disintegrates even more if stirred or
| agitated. In many other applications it replaces a pleasantly
| tactile and textured starch with a sort of sludge slurry, but
| as is often the case if you know and expect this it can be
| used in some applications advantageously. Thickening a stew
| is one of them. It's actually my favorite stew thickener. We
| discovered this the hard way once, though. We just "threw
| some rice" into a stew, and, well, if you put enough "sludge
| slurry" into a stew it starts to dominate... since then,
| though, it's been something very useful, especially since I'm
| allergic to flour, one of the traditional choices.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| It's not bad, _per se_. It depends what you 're going for.
| There's a lot of different ways to cook rice "properly"
| depending on the end dish. Congee, risotto, paella, sushi,
| etc. all have you cook rice differently while adding various
| degrees of liquid at different times.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Same. Also to make risotto you cook the rice with everything
| else and keep stirring so the rice absorbs all of it whilst
| releasing starch to make that creamy texture.
| muzani wrote:
| It doesn't work well with most Asian dishes with sauces. Such
| as butter chicken, curry, the stuff with coconut milk,
| sambal.
|
| I think stew might be an exception, because you want it to be
| porridge-like. But for many sauces, that's too soggy. You
| usually want it to soak for a few seconds to minutes but not
| an hour.
| SpaceL10n wrote:
| To mix or not to mix? That is the question. Whether 'tis nobler
| in the mind to suffer, the soaking of pasta in outrageous
| marinara, or to take arms against a sea of sauce.
|
| I remember Anthony Bourdain asking his Sicilian family this
| question, and the table erupted in hot debate. I'm not sure you
| are "wrong".
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Mixing and finishing the pasta in the sauce results in better
| tasting food. I don't care if some angry Sicilian claims
| that's not "authentic" or some garbage. They don't own the
| concept of pasta in tomato sauce anymore.
| torstenvl wrote:
| They never did. Tomatoes are 100% American. They do not
| grow natively in Italy or anywhere else in Europe.
| nszceta wrote:
| EUers mostly eat Tomatoes grown within a few hundred
| miles of EU borders. Not from America.
|
| Morocco is the leading supplier to the EU, accounting for
| 70% of the EU's total imports, followed by Turkey.
| xypage wrote:
| What they mean is that they originate from the Americas,
| not that it's the only place they grow, meaning it's not
| an ancient Italian dish. It didn't become popular in
| Italian food until the 18th century [1]
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato#Italy
| eddsh1994 wrote:
| While they might not have been making tomato-based pastas
| until the 17/18th century that's still earlier than the
| founding of the US - I think we can credit Sicily with
| having some impact on tomato based pastas!
| saiya-jin wrote:
| He meant historically, tomatoes are native to South
| America before being brought everywhere else. So ie a
| Sicilian getting angry about not doing some red sauce
| pasta dish due to feeling this is their heritage original
| dish and they have patent on the proper procedure... it
| depends how far back in time you look.
|
| Same ie potatoes in eastern Europe, a base in many many
| 'traditional' dishes. Yes if we look maybe 10 generations
| back, not so much for say 30 generations
| torstenvl wrote:
| Exactly. Use of red sauce in Italian cuisine is what, if
| it were invented today, we would call "Ibero-Italian
| fusion cuisine"; and the Spanish and Portuguese red
| sauces were developed after their early exploration of
| the Americas.
|
| So much of creativity is the result of mixing diverse
| elements in unique ways. And it's especially rich to rant
| about "purity" or cultural "ownership" regarding
| something that is fundamentally the result of such a
| fusion.
|
| EDIT: Speaking of which, if you haven't tried pasta or
| pizza with a Portuguese pepper-tomato sauce, you're
| missing out.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| buildbot wrote:
| I always found this to be extremely amusing, so much of
| our cultural food touchstones are less old than we think.
| Tempura for example, is originally Portuguese. Salmon was
| not used for sushi until pretty recently (needs to be
| flash frozen to be safe for this one). Japanese curry?
| From Britain! By way if India.
| acchow wrote:
| From India by way of Britain, right?
| buildbot wrote:
| Yes sorry. That is the better way to say it.
| bckr wrote:
| Biryani? Adapted from Persian cooking.
| buildbot wrote:
| Ooo that's a new one for me, awesome! Biryani is so good.
| jacknews wrote:
| Also, you don't have to boil the pasta for the full 8 minutes
| or whatever, just the first couple of minutes, then let it sit,
| eg https://www.barilla.com/en-gb/passive-cooking
| jdmtheNth wrote:
| I cared while I thought it was a way to better pasta. Very
| disappointing.
| jacknews wrote:
| It's pasta, in boiling/hot water, so I'm not sure there are
| many variables apart from time.
|
| I don't believe there's a 'gourmet method' or anything like
| that which can get better results than just 'correctly
| cooked' pasta.
|
| But, you can measure the perfect cooking time/hydration by
| measuring the length ratio of cooked/dry (assuming
| spaghetti):
| https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2201/2201.09621.pdf
|
| Perhaps you could use this to devise a protocol to parboil
| the pasta, and then finish hydrating it to the perfect
| consistency in the hot sauce.
| gpderetta wrote:
| Obvious in retrospect: once the water is boiling, any other
| increase of energy will only be used to evaporate the water.
| The temperature won't increase. And water can stay hot long
| enough to cook the pasta. Also less vapor in the environment.
| I'll try it next time.
| dgacmu wrote:
| +1. I used to subscribe to "huge pot of boiling water" until
| Kenji studied it.
|
| https://www.seriouseats.com/how-to-cook-pasta-salt-water-
| boi...
|
| I've switched to his method. It works really well. Doesn't
| take as long to boil, uses less gas, uses less water, uses
| less salt (b/c you waste less in the water). Now I just heat
| the water to boiling, throw in the pasta, let it come back to
| a boil, stir a bunch, turn off the heat, and put the lid on.
| Works every time.
| bakoo wrote:
| Had to wade through a lot of bad advice before finding a
| fellow Kenji acolyte ;) That man is an excellent teacher
| and a great mythbuster.
| throwaway743 wrote:
| And if you're making a red sauce, simmer a little anchovy paste
| or a couple anchovies (till they melt down) first with bay
| leaf, olive oil, and garlic before adding anything else into
| the pot. Broken up kalamata olives, basil, and onion are good
| around that point/shortly after too.
|
| And when you add in the tomato puree (or your preference), add
| a tiny bit of sugar. If the sauce looks like it has a sheen,
| it's ruined. Just a tiny amount will do.
|
| Do this and your sauce will taste 10 times better. Not a fan of
| anchovies, but you won't even be able to tell.
| donatj wrote:
| I really thought I hated spaghetti growing up. My parents would
| boil the noodles and then pour room temp sauce from a jar at
| the table individually. It was inedible.
|
| I was visiting a friend and had it all cooked together in the
| pan for the first time and it was eye opening.
| peteradio wrote:
| Can anyone recommend good books on PTSD for relief from
| reading about OPs childhood?
| pmarreck wrote:
| > room temp sauce
|
| dude. wtf? seriously this is almost child abuse
| gwbas1c wrote:
| One of the things I did my whole life was never criticize my
| mother's cooking. (She was a much better cook than me,
| especially her pasta sauce.)
|
| BUT: Once I started cooking I started coaching her back.
| Specifically, I taught her to defrost her burgers before
| grilling.
| bityard wrote:
| This reminds me...
|
| My parents were on the lower end of rural middle-class so on
| the rare occasion we went to a restaurant, steak was avoided
| as the most expensive thing on the menu, and as kids, we
| didn't have the option of steak anyway. Our meats while
| growing up were mainly fish, chicken, pork, and hamburger.
| When I was a teen, my mom got a deal on a big box of steaks
| somehow and cooked them on the grill every other night for
| dinner. She made it sound like we were living like royalty
| but no matter what kind of sauces or seasonings I slathered
| on, they were always dry and tasteless. I voluntarily skipped
| a lot of dinners that summer and thought I just hated steak.
|
| In my mid-20s, I befriended a Brazilian. He invited my spouse
| and I over for a barbecue. When we got there, I found out the
| only thing going on the grill was steak, a.k.a. Brazilian
| Beef. Basically thick chunks of steak "marinated" in rock
| salt then cooked over open coals to sear the outside, but
| never long enough to get the inside more than medium-rare. I
| probably mentioned not caring for steak but he assured me I
| was going to like it. And wow, he was right. So tasty, so
| juicy. Decades later, I still make it every chance I get.
|
| My wife and I sometimes talk about how our parents basically
| ruined whole categories of food for us until we got out into
| the world and experienced (or learned for ourselves) how
| things were _supposed_ to be cooked.
| DanCarvajal wrote:
| Growing up I went through the same thing and eventually
| talked to my mom about it and we came to the conclusion
| that it all went back to her parents who lived the Great
| Depression. When you grow up on Bread and Butter pickle
| sandwiches and then have industrialized food thrown at you
| post WWII you don't question it, but it has impacts on
| subsequent generations.
|
| Funny enough the other day I had a liverwurst sandwich,
| something my Grandmother would have easily recognized,
| except I bought it from a local whole animal butcher. What
| was once one of the cheapest forms of meat is now rare
| gourmet sandwich.
| halkony wrote:
| I've picked up on habits in my parents that resemble
| Great Depression era practices and their relationship
| with food is the most noticeable. Even my Dad who liked
| to cook as a hobby had very poor attention to detail when
| it came to quality. My mother basically made horribly
| seasoned slop and thought it was perfectly edible. My
| grandfather was extremely concerned with my mother having
| a full belly, probably at the cost of quality (a rational
| worldview when you've experienced starvation firsthand).
|
| At this point, when I meet people my age who describe
| themselves as "picky eaters" my internal response is
| "Your parents were probably just bad cooks." At least the
| experience taught me to take responsibility for what I
| put into my body.
| floxy wrote:
| Super tasters are a thing.
|
| https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=super+tasters&ia=web
| halkony wrote:
| Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer burns his
| tongue so bad he becomes a super taster. And the only
| food he can eat is Bart's cafeteria food because it's so
| bland haha.
|
| Interestingly, the wikipedia page for super tasters
| mentions that "some studies also show that increased
| sensitivity to bitter tastes may be a cause of selective
| eating." Interesting potential feedback loop.
| Spivak wrote:
| That's the spaghetti where the starches have curled back up
| and make it so the noodles and sauce are like oil and water.
| Ahh childhood.
| thiscatis wrote:
| Room temp sauce on cooked pasta?! Just gagged reading this.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Can be the right thing to do--if it's not a red sauce.
| Pesto, oil-"sauces", that kind of thing.
| pc86 wrote:
| That probably wouldn't be described as "inedible" then.
| donatj wrote:
| It was red sauce. Anything other than red sauce is too
| fancy for my parents.
|
| My wife and I always heat the pesto a little in the pan -
| is that not the right thing to do?
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Pesto burns really easily and its flavors after cooking
| are generally regarded as worse than when it's uncooked.
| Heating it a little probably doesn't hurt, but it's
| intended to be kind of a _fresh_ sauce, so, little or no
| cooking. Doesn 't come through as well with the jar stuff
| vs. home-made, but still.
| notadev wrote:
| You should really check out /r/shittyfoodporn if you want
| to see just how much you can take.
| CBLT wrote:
| I got through college on this, it actually wasn't that bad.
| I added little sauce (Most expensive part of the dish! I
| didn't buy cheap sauce.) and folded it into the boiling hot
| noodles immediately after draining. Brought the whole dish
| almost immediately to serving temperature, so I could eat
| right away instead of waiting for it to cool.
| peteradio wrote:
| _clammy mouth noises_
| bob1029 wrote:
| > One trick is to crush the garlic and let the oil it's in
| carry the flavor.
|
| I usually saute garlic in oil separately, discard the garlic
| and then use the oil as a sort of super garlic flavor
| concentrate.
|
| I used to believe the actual ingredients were ~80% of the
| puzzle of cooking. I now believe they're closer to ~20% for
| most cases. The process you follow is way more important than
| anything else.
|
| Just take a sweet onion for instance. The difference 2-3
| minutes makes in a hot pan is incredible. If you simply chopped
| it up and threw it directly into whatever, you will wind up
| with something that tastes substantially less flavorful.
| hgsgm wrote:
| > it expands when freshly cooked but not when cool.
|
| Make noodle soup and let it sit in the fridge for a week. It
| will expand.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Yeah but "let sit in fridge for a week" is probably not a
| great instruction in the middle of an easy weeknight dinner.
| sllabres wrote:
| Heat your plates (e.g. with the cooking water) and rub dry to
| prevent your your delicious meal get cold too soon. This is of
| course not only good for pasta.
| yamtaddle wrote:
| Relatedly, I spent far too long cooking my pizza sauce,
| treating it like other red sauces.
|
| You can just mix tomato sauce, oregano, salt, and pepper, then
| slap it on the pie. It cooks in the oven. No need to pre-cook
| it.
|
| [EDIT] unless you're gonna use it for dipping. There's a reason
| places have a separate "marinara", often, for that purpose.
| Even giving your pizza sauce a quick simmer will make it a lot
| better for dipping. Raw pizza sauce is... palatable, but not
| great, for dipping.
| ahallock wrote:
| I agree that people need to learn to combine them (add a little
| butter, too!). I like both variations, honestly. With most
| things, it's not either or, and there are different taste
| profiles. It's like variations on pizza where the sauce is
| added last.
| moffkalast wrote:
| > Unlike rice, it's fine to "soak" pasta in the sauce
|
| Risotto would like a word.
| gpderetta wrote:
| You still don't soak risotto, you keep the liquid content
| within limits.
|
| Also different rices.
| efxhoy wrote:
| I learned this from the sopranos: https://youtu.be/J2TkCgLooRU
| maliker wrote:
| Someone introduced me to making red sauce by basically just
| cooking tomatoes for as much time as I have, and it's now my
| go-to red sauce. Really amazing how good just well-cooked
| tomatoes are. https://www.seriouseats.com/frankies-tomato-
| sauce-recipe
| bckr wrote:
| +1 just for the link to Serious Eats.
|
| If you have a recipe in mind to make, look it up on Serious
| Eats. Their MO is to give you ideas on how to level up each
| recipe (compared to food network or similar) and explain the
| principles behind the techniques.
| kristjansson wrote:
| And really do look them up. In my experience they've
| completely lost the SEO game, so SRPs are not a reliable
| entry point to their (wealth of) content.
| moffkalast wrote:
| Well that should also be how they make tomato sauce you buy
| in the store, it's just filtered so you don't get seeds and
| large pieces of peel in it.
| eddsh1994 wrote:
| You can reduce the olive oil/salt for a lower-
| calorie/sodium version which is good for weight loss/high
| blood pressure
| fedeb95 wrote:
| The following is well known by Italians, but apparently not the
| rest of the world so I'll post here. I'll use italian names
| whenever I don't know the english ones so you can search them
| and make a cool impression on friends. This is the base of any
| tomato based sauce:
|
| 1. Choose your soffritto base. Onion or garlic are fine, more
| exotic variations include scalogno or porro.
|
| 2. Choose your tomato. Canned, fresh, whatever, just keep in
| mind that fresh ones may need longer cooking times. As for
| canned, check that they contain no seasoning at all!
|
| 3. Choose your grease. Oil or butter are fine, the standard is
| olive oil though. It may be hard to find proper olive oil
| outside of Italy I'm told.
|
| 4. Start cooking. Put your oil in a large pan, enough to
| contain all the pasta you plan to use afterwards. Not too much
| oil: just enough to cover the pan with a thin layer. Don't
| start heating the pan.
|
| 5. Cut your onion or whatever in small pieces and add them to
| the oil. Now turn on the heat at a reasonable level. Not too
| high but not low. Don't touch the onion!
|
| 6. When the onion looks a bit browny (not dark brown), add the
| tomato and lower at minimum the heat. If you have a
| thermometer, ideally you don't want to cross 60 degrees celsius
| over all the cooking period. This period can vary between 10
| minutes and 60 minutes, it gives different tastes (all good) to
| the sauce. If you opt for the shortest time, go back at step 5
| and at the same time start the next step.
|
| 7. Put 1l of water for every 100g of pasta in a pot. Add salt.
| With experience you'll get the right amount, usually I use
| about a small fist for two people (160-200g). Heat up the water
| and wait until boiling.
|
| 8. Drop the pasta in the water. Start a chronometer. Almost
| immediately mix it or otherwise it will stick. Wait a couple of
| minutes and mix again.
|
| 9. Meanwhile the sauce will start bubbling and, depending on
| your kitchen, you may need to mix it. If you see large
| discrepancies in texture, definitely mix. Otherwise don't. If
| it becomes too dry, add some water from the cooking pasta to
| the sauce.
|
| 10. When the chronometer is at cooking_time_on_pasta_packaging
| - 2 minutes, take a glass of water and fill it with water from
| the pasta pot. Dry the pasta, and put it in the pan with the
| sauce. Make the heat level for the pan a bit higher.
|
| 11. Cook it until "al dente", that is still a bit hard at the
| inside, but not completely. If the sauce dries too much (it
| should, if not turn the heat higher), add the water you kept in
| the glass. This step is where science stops and art begins: you
| need to calibrate your taste to your desired results and in
| turn calibrate water and heating. During all this step, mix
| your pasta in the same direction continuously. This is called
| "risottatura". Taste the pasta while cooking often.
|
| 11. Take everything off the fire, serve, add parmisan.
|
| Edit: look at maccard comment for water and salt because I
| don't recall the right quantities. After a while you go by eye.
|
| Edit 2: preventing more comments on oil, that is merely my very
| limited experience and I'd say, as a rule of thumb (not
| incontrovertible truth), that if you like your oil alone with
| bread it is a good oil.
| maccard wrote:
| This post is wrong in many areas,
|
| > Canned, fresh, whatever, just keep in mind that fresh ones
| may need longer cooking times.
|
| Unless you know you've got _excellent_ fresh tomatoes, canned
| ones will win.
|
| > Oil or butter are fine
|
| Cooking your onion in butter is going to give a very very
| different result to using oil. Personally speaking, not one I
| would recommend.
|
| > It may be hard to find proper olive oil outside of Italy
| I'm told.
|
| High quality dop/docg olive oil is readily available all over
| the world, and there are plenty of places all around the
| mediterranean that have olive oil as good as Italian oil.
|
| > Put 1l of water for every 100g of pasta in a pot. Add salt.
|
| This is way too much water. serious eats[0] has an excellent
| article that is well worth reading if you care about pasta.
| You also should give an indication of how much salt to use -
| it's way way way more than you think it is. Like, tablespoon
| of salt per litre of water salty.
|
| [0] https://www.seriouseats.com/how-to-cook-pasta-salt-water-
| boi...
| johnmaguire wrote:
| >> > It may be hard to find proper olive oil outside of
| Italy I'm told.
|
| > High quality dop/docg olive oil is readily available all
| over the world, and there are plenty of places all around
| the mediterranean that have olive oil as good as Italian
| oil.
|
| There's a whole rabbit hole you can go down here. It's not
| clear cut AFAICT.[0]
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olive_oil_regulation_and_
| adult...
| maccard wrote:
| Nowhere in that link does it say that it only happens on
| exports. It's also true of pretty much any product, e.g.
| wine [0], parmesan [1], champagne [2] .
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_fraud#Examples
|
| [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/rebeccahughes/2022/06/02
| /cheese...
|
| [2] https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2022/12/e2m-of-
| fake-champa...
| johnmaguire wrote:
| I'm not saying it only happens on exports, nor am I
| arguing it happens with only olive oil. I'm responding
| directly to your claim that "high quality dop/docg olive
| oil is readily available all over the world."
|
| It may be available, but readily available seems like a
| bit of a stretch to me. It can be deceptively difficult
| to obtain.
|
| > It's reliably reported that 80% of the Italian olive
| oil on the market is fraudulent.[0]
|
| [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ceciliarodriguez/2016/02
| /10/the...
| thiht wrote:
| >> Canned, fresh, whatever, just keep in mind that fresh
| ones may need longer cooking times. > > Unless you know
| you've got _excellent_ fresh tomatoes, canned ones will
| win.
|
| I would agree on this one. I live in France, so not that
| far from Italy, and our fresh tomatoes suck compared to
| Italian fresh tomatoes. Italian cuisine use simple products
| with few transformations because their products are
| amazing. If I try to do something as basic as tomato-
| mozzarella at home, it'll never be as good as the same
| Italian recipe because our tomatoes don't grow in the same
| weather.
|
| Italian cuisine is very hard to make at home as well as
| they do it because of the quality of their raw products.
| fedeb95 wrote:
| In this case yes, canned is better. Also longer cooking
| times. A trick for canned products is checking the
| indications of when they were harvested, for Italian
| products you have letters for the year of production, I
| bet there are similar rules in other countries as well.
| Better to get tomatoes harvested in summer and not too
| long ago
| fedeb95 wrote:
| I disagree about tomatoes, you're right that to have a
| difference in taste of tomato alone you need very good
| tomatoes, but I was assuming the good taste of all the
| ingredients used. Anyway, using fresh tomatoes, especially
| if small, changes a dish completely because of its texture.
|
| About oil it's clear, I think, if not sorry, that that is
| my experience, and as such should be interpreted. If you
| have good oil, all is good. I like to use butter, it's not
| standard but it's used. Of course you need less butter than
| the same amount of oil you'd use.
|
| As for water/salt, you may be right and I will update my
| comment. I go by eye because I'm accustomed to the right
| quantities (or I taste the water for salt) so I was going
| by memory.
| maccard wrote:
| > but I was assuming the good taste of all the
| ingredients used.
|
| In that case your entire post can be replaced with "use
| high quality ingredients, cook them".
|
| > Anyway, using fresh tomatoes, especially if small,
| changes a dish completely because of its texture.
|
| The texture is different, but "fresh" tomatoes that are
| readily available to most people even in season from
| their greengrocers are a poor substitue for even
| supermarket tinned tomatoes. My experience in Italy (and
| france/spain/croatia) is that excellent stuff is
| _available_, but it's not necessary "just" to use italian
| tomatoes - there's plenty of awful tomatoes available,
| and a large amount of the high quality tomatoes that
| _are_ grown in italy are canned and available outside
| italy; again DOCG San Marzano Tinned Tomatoes are
| available in supermarkets here in the UK.
|
| > About oil it's clear, I think, if not sorry, that that
| is my experience, and as such should be interpreted.
|
| It _really_ didn't come across as that to me, it came
| fedeb95 wrote:
| Again on butter: historically it was used in the north of
| Italy a lot, especially in the mountains, where oil
| wasn't available. My father didn't know what oil was when
| he was a boy. It was used in the center and south of
| Italy before it spread to everywhere. Today you will
| almost always find oil used, but I think it's an
| interesting variation. You can also do a split of oil and
| butter.
| jaclaz wrote:
| Roughly the dividing line between use of oil vs. butter
| (or lard) in traditional regional cuisine was slightly
| north of Bologna, until relatively recent times (I would
| say until post 2nd world war).
|
| South, oil.
|
| North, butter.
|
| My grandmother (from Parma) firmly believed that olive
| oil was to be used uncooked for salads and similar.
|
| JFYI:
|
| https://www.cittadellolio.it/2017/06/15/olio-
| cucina-4-secoli...
| fedeb95 wrote:
| This is the basic: many variations are possible, like heating
| oil before putting in the onion, onion cooking temperature,
| adding spices (but the only one I really like added is
| pepper). Also risottatura times can vary: some recipes are so
| extreme as cooking the raw pasta directly in the sauce, but
| unless you're making those specific recipes this is not
| recommended. A good time is 4 minutes, also 1 is good, if you
| want you can skip risottatura but at least do a copule of
| turns to pasta with sauce to mix everything together.
| gpderetta wrote:
| I have cooked the past directly in the sauce quite a few
| times. It tastes way better, but it takes way longer, so I
| don't bother much :)
| SSLy wrote:
| All of those are true but >It may be hard to find proper
| olive oil outside of Italy I'm told.
|
| Spanish and Greeks have nothing to be shy about here.
| fedeb95 wrote:
| It wasn't meant as a criticism for other countries oil, I
| just am not aware of them and I haven't heard of them. If
| you like your oil with bread alone, the oil is a good oil.
| timeon wrote:
| > Spanish and Greeks
|
| Portugal as well.
| nlh wrote:
| Two related tips while on the subject:
|
| 1) Salt your pasta water! Pasta is meant to be cooked in salty
| water that, according and excellently-put by Samin Nosrat
| (Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat) - "is reminiscent of the sea".
|
| 2) Save and use a splash of ("dirty") pasta water - aka the
| water the pasta was just cooked in - when you're tossing the
| pasta with the sauce. The water is filled with delightful
| liquified starch from the pasta, and it helps the sauce coat
| the pasta more thoroughly.
| williamdclt wrote:
| Some more pasta water insights:
|
| - A good ratio of salt/water is one tablespoon per litre (or
| gallon). Reduce if the sauce is going to be very salty
| already (eg carbonara). We're talking kosher salt here
| (specifically Diamon Crystal), if using table salt it's
| probably going to be half of that: salt density varies a lot
| depending on the type.
|
| - Cook your pasta is _as little_ water as possible. For some
| reason there's some myth that you want to cook pasta in a
| large volume of water: that's BS. What makes pasta water
| "liquid gold" is the starch that comes from the pasta, you
| want that as concentrated as possible.
| Spivak wrote:
| Oh god please don't to 1 TB of salt per gallon you need way
| more. I would do 4TB because although it's more than 1%
| salt it's easy to remember and close enough. As long as you
| stay less than 2% you're probably good for average salt
| tolerance.
| cossatot wrote:
| I think he meant 'quart' rather than 'gallon' because the
| first reference is for 'litre'
| williamdclt wrote:
| Sorry yes! As cossatot points out in the sibling comment,
| I meant quart. Not used to american metrics.
| dfxm12 wrote:
| _A good ratio of salt /water is one tablespoon per litre
| (or gallon)_
|
| A gallon is 3.5-4 litres. This doesn't seem right.
|
| _Cook your pasta is _as little_ water as possible._
|
| This advice is worthless without some baseline like g of
| pasta to l water or how much water to cover your pasta
| with. You should cook your pasta in a large volume of water
| so the water will still be hot when you add the pasta and
| the pasta will be cooked as quickly as possible. Too little
| water and you risk the pasta sticking to itself as well.
| All this in mind, properly cooked pasta with diluted pasta
| water is a better outcome than starchy pasta water with
| pasta that has an odd texture. Maybe that last bit is
| personal preference, but when eating pasta, the first thing
| I notice is the texture of the pasta, not the starchiness
| of the pasta water. Hell, maybe we're thinking about the
| same amount of water, and you've just seen people try to
| cook with comically large amounts, I dunno.
| CBLT wrote:
| +1 to the as little water as possible tip, that's worked
| well for me. The emulsifying properties transmit flavors
| really well, I like to infuse a tiny bit of oil to stir in.
| antognini wrote:
| Pasta water should be "as salty as tears."
| Vinnl wrote:
| What does salting your pasta water do, other than aligning
| with how it was "meant to be"? I've never noticed a
| difference, but also didn't salt it that extensively, and
| this was years ago.
| michaelchisari wrote:
| You need to salt it enough that the pasta itself becomes
| salty. So the sauce you use doesn't have to have much salt,
| a pinch or two, and the pasta carries the saltiness
| instead.
| muzani wrote:
| Without salt, the pasta tastes plain. You can't really make
| up for it by salting the sauce more, the pasta carries it
| better.
|
| And in dishes with less salt, you'd normally salt the pasta
| and not the sauce.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| It makes the pasta salty. It's not just pasta - almost any
| dish will be better if you salt/season as you go instead of
| adding it on top at the end
| leephillips wrote:
| Also the water will boil at a higher temperature. I
| wonder if this affects the texture of the pasta. I
| suppose it will cook somewhat faster.
| halkony wrote:
| In college I got into an argument about this, believing
| this was the primary reason to salt the water. I was
| wrong -- at best it raises the boiling temp by 2F which
| is negligible.
| leephillips wrote:
| Yeah, I used to think that too, but later I suspected it
| was actually as you say.
| throwaway743 wrote:
| In addition to flavoring, it helps the pasta not stick
| together when you're boiling it. Add a small amount of
| olive oil as extra help for that
| thiht wrote:
| > Add a small amount of olive oil as extra help for that
|
| It really doesn't. Oil doesn't mix with water. The only
| thing it does is oiling your pasta when you drain the
| water, which prevents the sauce from sticking correctly.
|
| Pasta naturally don't stick together if you use a pot
| large enough, with enough water. And even then it doesn't
| stick, I honestly don't know how people make their pasta
| stick.
| gpderetta wrote:
| > with enough water.
|
| that's another secret to making pasta: abundant water,
| not just barely covering it.
| mattrighetti wrote:
| 1a) Salt your water when it reaches boiling temperature, then
| put pasta in it.
| kristjansson wrote:
| Not sure who said it, but I've had the advice "enough salt to
| scare your guests" in my head for years. Adding the salt
| after the water boils is also very, very satisfying.
| 4ggr0 wrote:
| > "is reminiscent of the sea"
|
| Had lots of funny moments in my life relating to salting
| pasta water. Almost all the people I know put like two
| pinches of salt into the water. Which causes them to look at
| me like I'm a psycho when I pour salt in for almost a full
| second, straight out of the container.
|
| I can +1 both of your tips, I follow them both since I
| learned to cook and they're a (small but effective) game-
| changer.
| raldi wrote:
| For our big pasta pot, I put in a literal handful.
| duped wrote:
| I agree it's kind of absurd to "salt" your pasta water with
| a pinch of salt (you're doing nothing!), but for me it's a
| lot more efficient to let the sauce to have the saltiness
| than to waste handfuls of salt going into water that I'm
| going to dump out.
|
| INB4, "save your pasta water." I don't have a big kitchen
| or freezer, a pot full of water is a giant waste of space
| for me.
| bobbylarrybobby wrote:
| The reason to salt the water is not to add saltiness to
| the pasta but to raise the water's boiling point.
| williamdclt wrote:
| it's really not, it doesn't change the boiling point any
| sort of meaningfully.
| gpderetta wrote:
| Boil the water to evaporation and recover the salt!
|
| disclaimer: it might be /slightly/ energy inefficient.
|
| But salt your water, salting the sauce is just not the
| same.
| williamdclt wrote:
| - Lots of salt in the sauce means you'll have very salty
| sauce with undersalted pasta. It might work out fine if
| the sauce coats really well, but will still be slightly
| different.
|
| - Ingredients cook differently when salted. Not sure
| about pasta specifically: I _think_ I can taste a
| difference between pasta cooked in salted water and pasta
| salted after being cooked, but I'm not certain.
|
| - Definitely don't keep pasta water around, it's just for
| the sauce you're currently making
| duped wrote:
| This is missing the forest for the trees. The point is
| not to make restaurant quality pasta and sauce, it's to
| not have to buy salt from the store every week. It's
| wasteful for little benefit.
|
| I can't ever say I've felt like cooking pasta without
| salt is "under salted." Is it as savory and delicious as
| what I'd buy at a restaurant? No - but having done it
| like that in the past I just think the benefits are
| marginal for how much you waste.
| williamdclt wrote:
| I wouldn't say it's "forest for the trees", but I see the
| point that it's a choice of trade-offs.
|
| I make pasta _very_ often, I love it and want it to be as
| good as it possibly can, so I'm very happy optimising for
| taste. FWIW I use a tablespoon of salt per portion, and
| get a 1.3kg pack of salt every few months: hardly a huge
| waste!
| nameless912 wrote:
| Most people just dip a coffee mug in the pasta just
| before they drain it to keep some water back. I don't
| think I've ever heard of anyone freezing pasta water.
|
| As for "salty water vs. salty sauce", the better way from
| a culinary perspective is both. Over salting one thing to
| compensate for another thing often leads to uneven
| flavor; if everything is salted roughly appropriately it
| all kinda comes together without any extra effort. I
| suggest trying it, hell maybe even do an A/B test. It's
| subtle, but salt penetrating the pasta during cooking
| makes it taste that much better.
| stephen_g wrote:
| The thing about saving pasta water is about not throwing
| it all away when draining the pasta - just keeping a
| little back to toss in with the pasta and the sauce. It's
| not saving it for later.
| gpderetta wrote:
| About as salty as the sea is also my rule of thumb (of
| course how salty is the sea you are familiar with varies :)
| )
| williamdclt wrote:
| Unless you really love salt, you want much less salinity
| in pasta than the sea (1-2% for pasta, 3.5% in the sea).
| Kenji Alt-Lopez says that you want your pasta water "as
| salty as you remember the sea is", not as salty as the
| sea actually is because it's way too much!
| gpderetta wrote:
| Maybe it is not exactly as salty as the sea :)
| themeiguoren wrote:
| If you've ever been at sea and tried to use seawater to
| cook pasta, you'll realize that it's too much salt. 1:1
| seawater to fresh water turns out perfect (and saves your
| fresh water).
| jimt1234 wrote:
| Managing my money. For much of my career, or just my adult life,
| I never did anything related to money management. I just worked
| and saved. That's it.
|
| A little context: Growing up, no one ever talked about managing
| their money. No one had any money to manage. Everyone in my
| circle lived paycheck-to-paycheck. Any talk about money
| management was for rich folk, and that wasn't us. So basically, I
| never learned any of this stuff. Next, my career hit its stride
| right after the Enron scandal, and then the early-2000s dot-com
| meltdown. So I just saw investment/retirement accounts, and the
| stock market in general, as a big con to steal my money. (If you
| don't know about the Enron scandal, and you wanna be depressed,
| read up.) Anyway, I was full of FUD, and I was just gonna keep
| stuffing money in my mattress.
|
| Then, a random conversation with a trusted colleague led to him
| spending an entire afternoon explaining it all to me. He
| explained that his various investments were extremely low-risk,
| and he was still making thousands every year, and that my
| mattress-stuffing strategy was leaving a lot of easy money on the
| table. It was the way he explained it all, and the fact that I
| trusted/respected him that changed everything for me. I'll always
| owe him.
| e10jc wrote:
| I feel you on this! As a follow up: what are some of the top
| tips you would recommend?
| [deleted]
| ralmidani wrote:
| Putting off an annual checkup with a PCP (I'm 42, and the last
| PCP I had was a pediatrician). I had long suspected my
| cholesterol and triglycerides were high due to family history and
| my excessive love for cheese, and last week that suspicion was
| confirmed. I'm now more resolute than ever on lifestyle changes
| (exercise, less red meat, getting most of my calcium from 2%
| milk).
|
| On the bright side, I also got reassurance that outside the lipid
| panel, everything else (sugar, kidney and liver function, PSA,
| etc.) seems normal.
|
| Other than laziness and procrastination, a huge part of me was
| dreading being told I need a prostate exam and colonoscopy, but
| fortunately I don't need either for at least 3 more years.
| xwowsersx wrote:
| > less red meat
|
| IIUC, they no longer believe that lipid cholesterol levels are
| directly correlated with intake of dietary cholesterol. See,
| for example: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-
| should-you...
|
| > The biggest influence on blood cholesterol level is the mix
| of fats and carbohydrates in your diet--not the amount of
| cholesterol you eat from food.
|
| > Although it remains important to limit the amount of
| cholesterol you eat, especially if you have diabetes, for most
| people dietary cholesterol is not as problematic as once
| believed.
|
| I would recommend committing to getting a full blood panel
| (specific to your sex, male or female) at least every 6 months,
| especially if you are going to be making significant changes to
| your diet. This was a game-changer for me. I started working
| with a practice that does health optimization and blood
| work/labs and has doctors who know how to interpret the results
| and give recommendations based on them. For me, I had several
| biomarkers significantly improve by consuming more red meat. I
| hadn't been trying to avoid red meat consciously, just somehow
| over the years I started consuming a lot more chicken and
| turkey and really wasn't having enough beef, etc.
| kingnothing wrote:
| Red meat is a carcinogen according to the WHO.
|
| https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-
| content/uploads/2018/07/pr240_E....
|
| https://worldanimalfoundation.org/advocate/farm-
| animals/para....
| Georgelemental wrote:
| Are there any randomized controlled trials that show this?
| (As opposed to no-randomized observational studies)
| generalizations wrote:
| That's not true. The WHO thinks red meat _might_ be a
| carcinogen. From the Q &A mentioned in your first link [0].
| Also, I would not consider your second link a reliable
| source. An animal-rights group is not unbiased.
|
| > In the case of red meat, the classification is based on
| limited evidence from epidemiological studies showing
| positive associations between eating red meat and
| developing colorectal cancer as well as strong mechanistic
| evidence.
|
| > Limited evidence means that a positive association has
| been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer but
| that other explanations for the observations (technically
| termed chance, bias, or confounding) could not be ruled
| out.
|
| [0] https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-
| content/uploads/2018/11/Monograp...
| DantesKite wrote:
| My suspicion is that it's the sodium nitrates used in
| treating certain meats that's causing a lot of the
| cancer. But this is just speculation on my end.
| rubicon33 wrote:
| How do you go about getting a full blood panel every 6 mo?
| Doesn't that come from your primary care doctor? Mine would
| think I'm insane if I asked for a full blood panel every 6
| months at my age with no health issues. But I see the utility
| in it (trends in the data, anomalies, etc.). So how to do it?
| xwowsersx wrote:
| Yeah, you're right. No way in hell I could get my doctor to
| get a full blood panel every 6 months. Even if I could get
| him to get me one, he won't order all the stuff I want to
| see. So I use a boutique, turnkey telemedicine practice
| (I'm not sure how else to describe it). I order the blood
| panel and then go over the results with one of their expert
| patient care coordinators and then speak with one or more
| of their doctors as needed (all over Zoom). The one I use
| is Marek Health, but there are others
| (https://marekhealth.com/)
|
| I think my initial intake was $200-300 to get the full
| blood panel and have a follow-up with a patient care
| coordinator as well as an appointment with the doctor (who
| is incredible). At the time I ordered the blood panel, I
| wasn't even planning on having a long-term relationship
| with them, but after seeing some stuff on my blood panel
| that I wanted to work on and having them come up with a
| plan, speaking to the docs regularly, I've just gotten so
| much value out of it. The whole thing made me feel like
| "wow, this is what healthcare should feel like."
|
| Sadly, it's all out of pocket, but it's the last thing on
| the list of things I would complain about having to spend
| money on.
|
| For some people, full bloods every 6 months might be
| overkill, I guess it just depends on what you have going on
| (not that I had major issues, but definitely things to
| address and others to optimize). But without a full panel,
| you're just flying blind. Sometimes, I get the panel and
| nothing has moved at all and there's nothing to do. Other
| times there are things I can easily address and the more
| panels I have, the more of a personal health profile I have
| to work with.
| william_T wrote:
| What physician is saying no to preventative medicine paid
| for by the consumer? Why do doctors think we are visiting
| for their benefit? I would be very interested in the
| arguments against blood labs. For the doctor, they draw
| blood and review results, which is something they do
| every day. For the patient, you draw blood and review
| results and pay for it, which is something normal people
| are not greatly inconvenienced by. The money may be the
| thing, but why would your physician know your budget? If
| you want a zero risk preventative procedure, the doctor
| should tell you how much it is, not give financial
| advice.
|
| What argument would a doctor have against order a wider
| range of tests? The blood is outside of your body, and
| the physician is not in the lab running the centrifuge or
| mixing chemical agents to react.
| schrijver wrote:
| The reasoning I heard from a GP is: the more values you
| get back, the higher the chance of a false positive. A GP
| who has blood tested will do so based on your symptoms.
| Get the lab to do all the possible tests, and chances are
| at least one of them will be off but since you had no
| symptoms you're going to have to test again since it
| might be a false positive. All this takes a lot of time
| and creates feelings of insecurity with the patient. So
| where I'm from, there are no 'check-ups' within insured
| or government funded health care, you strictly react on
| symptoms. There are only checks for specific forms of
| cancer and you're invited for this specifically. Don't
| know whether this is the best way, but it's an
| explanation for the approach.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Every Primary Care doctor visit I've ever had in my life
| (note: USA) felt like a cross between an assembly line
| and the DMV. It's all about rushing you through the visit
| as quickly as possible, spending as little time with the
| actual expensive doctor as possible, and getting you out
| the door so that other cu$tomer$ can get crammed through
| after you. Blood labs? They aint got time for that!
|
| And nowadays, to make matters worse, I have to book an
| appointment for this delightful experience 2 months in
| advance for my existing doctor, and five months in
| advance for a "new patient visit" at a new doctor.
| Everything around Family Doctors says "go away".
| chordalkeyboard wrote:
| > What physician is saying no to preventative medicine
| paid for by the consumer?
|
| its more common than you think; and many professionals
| resent the idea that its anything resembling a 'free
| market' where a 'consumer' (patient) can 'order services'
| without their provider's approval.
|
| as you might imagine there are reasonable-sounding prima
| facie arguments for both sides of this discussion.
| qorrect wrote:
| I have to fight with the doctor every time I want
| something he doesn't deem necessary.
| boringg wrote:
| Eating less red meat is about lowering your inflammation in
| your veins - which is a major part of the battle for
| atherosclerosis. Agreed it's not about your dietary
| cholesterol. Dairy fat is a big issue for atherosclerosis.
|
| However risk factors are individual so take everyones
| commentary as educational but apply on what's relevant look
| at your on individual use case.
| rubicon33 wrote:
| It's not red meat causing the inflammation.
|
| It's sugar.
| boringg wrote:
| Sugar also a culprit - its not a red meat vs sugar thing.
| However one of the top researchers in cholesterol in the
| US told me specifically to eat red meat once a year as it
| has inflammation qualities that are risky for people who
| have higher risk factors for a cardiac event.
| ralmidani wrote:
| For the general population, meat and eggs are OK within
| reasonable amounts of consumption. But those with genetic
| susceptibility to high cholesterol need to be more careful
| about their diet than the general population. Same story with
| diabetes and hypertension.
|
| Edit: FWIW, I'm not planning on abandoning red meat and eggs,
| but striving for no more than 4 eggs a week and 1, or max 2,
| servings of red meat. I would rather enjoy beef and lamb for
| the rest of my life and avoid ever having to eat only egg
| whites.
| Jommi wrote:
| FYI the above is american-focused healthcare language. There
| are no annual checkups in most other countries outside of
| certain age or risk groups.
|
| You might however get a health checkup from occupational
| healthcare sometimes!
|
| Just putting this a note here for non-american readers so they
| don't get confused.
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| That being said most people in America don't get annual
| checkups unless they have issues either. And there's also a
| school of thought that more preventative medicine would be a
| good thing, so maybe other countries should consider it.
| floor2 wrote:
| That's kind of shocking to me. The normal narrative is about
| how much better the European model is for healthcare, but
| then you're saying it's missing one of the most fundamental
| and effective aspects of healthcare (preventative care &
| early intervention)?
|
| Do you go to the dentist for regular cleaning & exams or only
| go if you have a toothache?
|
| Annual checkups seem so critical to overall health outcomes-
| it's far better to catch cancer at stage 1 than stage 4, or
| to address blood pressure before having a stroke or heart
| attack rather than after, I'd have thought they'd be strongly
| prioritized and incentivized my government-controlled
| healthcare systems.
| mijoharas wrote:
| Yep, I had to Google PCP (I know one acronym PCP, and I was
| _fairly_ sure that wasn't what the commenter was referring
| to).
|
| Primary Care Physician for anyone else wondering (equivalent
| to a GP in England I think)
| roncesvalles wrote:
| My family doctor in Canada does an annual check-up (BMI,
| basic physical, blood and urine) that's covered by provincial
| healthcare. In addition, those over 50 get a colon cancer
| check every two years that used to be a full colonoscopy but
| now it's a new poop sample test.
|
| I'm surprised other countries with free government healthcare
| don't do that. I would assume it's more economical to detect
| signs of serious issues early.
| digianarchist wrote:
| Which province? I've never been offered this from my doctor
| in Ontario, in fact when I requested blood tests it was
| denied so I had to drive to the US to get my own.
| Semaphor wrote:
| > I would assume
|
| So would I (Germany), yet it's only one blood test every 3
| years from the age of 35 on.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Tangentially, it's common for your employer's health
| insurance provider to provide a discount if get an annual
| physical.
|
| Edit: (US specific)
| samsari wrote:
| Again, this is very USA-specific.
| Loughla wrote:
| I learned from my father's generation that regular check-ups
| were vital. My oldest two uncles died from heart issues in
| their early 60's. The next two and my father have made it to
| their 70's and show no signs of stopping. There isn't really
| any difference in lifestyles between the dead and alive ones,
| other than going to the doctor regularly, and taking whatever
| medicine they are prescribed. I guess one uncle quit smoking.
| So that's probably good for him.
| hacker_junky wrote:
| That's great news that your cholesterol and triglycerides were
| high and that everything else looks normal! Are there any other
| tips that you would suggest for making lifestyle changes to
| help lower cholesterol and triglycerides?
| broguinn wrote:
| High cholesterol runs in the family (my grandfather exercises
| 7 days a week, is thin as a rail, and had a heart attack at
| 60). I'm 31 and learned that I have high LDL two years ago.
|
| I can only speak to my case, so YMMV. Through a liver blood
| panel, I learned that I had high bilirubin, SHBG, and GGH -
| which indicate compromised gallbladder and liver function.
| One doctor suggested I have my gallbladder removed.
|
| Instead, through research on pubmed and examine.com, I was
| pointed to TUDCA - a bile salt that helps clear cholesterol
| and biliary sludge. After two months of supplementation, I've
| seen a severe reduction in intestinal discomfort - and I
| suspect a follow-up blood test will show a reduction in my
| high liver panel and LDL.
|
| If you have abnormally high LDL for your body type and
| lifestyle, I would encourage you to get a liver panel and
| look into TUDCA.
| ralmidani wrote:
| I'm not a Physician or Dietitian, but my dad is a
| Gastroenterologist and my wife is a Registered Dietitian, so
| some of their knowledge rubs off on me. And my PCP gave me
| some tips last week that are still fresh in my mind.
|
| - Exercise can help lower cholesterol slightly. But try to
| have a reasonable balance between cardio and resistance
| training. Too much cardio risks having some muscles actually
| weaken if you maintain a large calorie deficit.
|
| - Diet-wise, you want to go for sustainable weight
| management, so no extreme or gimmicky diets. Avoid Atkins and
| Keto (unless a professional tells you you actually need to
| avoid carbs), extreme fasting, etc.
|
| - 3 moderate meals a day are better than 2 or 1 large
| feast(s) because they keep your metabolism going for most of
| the day. Your body can adapt to feast/famine and can go into
| ketosis, but these are survival mechanisms and harmful, even
| counterproductive, if you keep your body in these modes for
| long periods of time (you might even gain weight in
| feast/famine mode because when you do eat, your body converts
| as much sugar into fat as it possibly can, in order to
| prepare reserves for the next "famine").
|
| - Some fasting is good for spirituality and to teach self-
| control, but it should not be a permanent state (I plan to
| fast Mondays and Thursdays as much as possible, leading up to
| Ramadan in about 50 days). Fasting every single day for the
| rest of your life is not realistic and probably does more
| harm than good.
|
| - Eat raw nuts (raw almonds have been observed to lower total
| cholesterol, lower LDL, and raise the HDL/LDL ratio) as much
| as you can within your calorie allowance. In general, more
| plant-based protein and fats, and less animal-based is very
| helpful (but watch out for high saturated fat from coconuts,
| and too much soy can mess up men's hormones). Edit: the soy
| evidence is not conclusive - see comments below.
|
| - Keep your calorie allowance reasonable and sustainable, and
| try to eat a good variety of fruits, vegetables, grains,
| beans, legume, meats, etc. with moderation in everything.
| boringg wrote:
| I'm going to ask for a reference on the soy comment. I know
| there's a lot of fear mongering on soy but I haven't heard
| of any studies to prove that.
|
| Rest of the advice seems good. Lower fat in diet
| (specifically dairy fats), increase exercise, higher fiber,
| lower sugar, more nuts/avocados/salmon.
|
| Treat the disease and not the numbers - so look at all your
| risk factors for atherosclerosis.
| ralmidani wrote:
| I'm not suggesting avoiding soy altogether, just
| cautioning against excessive consumption of it. Studies
| are showing mixed conclusions, but it's not all fear
| mongering:
|
| Study showing some effect:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15735098/
|
| Study showing little effect:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11880595/
|
| While the evidence is inconclusive, I wouldn't take
| chances if I were trying to have kids. I would imagine
| getting __all__ of your protein from soy could
| potentially be harmful, perhaps even in ways other than
| decreasing testosterone and sperm count.
|
| In general, everything in moderation is best.
| dibt wrote:
| > Fasting every single day for the rest of your life is not
| realistic and probably does more harm than good.
|
| What evidence is there for this statement? What is
| considered "fasting?" I can't see how a 12-hour feeding
| window would be problematic. I could understand some people
| might develop "disordered eating" if their approach is
| unsustainable, but "more harm than good" isn't true for
| those that can do it.
|
| One reason for fasting is that it improves insulin
| sensitivity.
|
| From: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/intermittent-
| fasting-sur...
|
| "Based on this, researchers from the University of Alabama
| conducted a study with a small group of obese men with
| prediabetes. They compared a form of intermittent fasting
| called "early time-restricted feeding," where all meals
| were fit into an early eight-hour period of the day (7 am
| to 3 pm), or spread out over 12 hours (between 7 am and 7
| pm). Both groups maintained their weight (did not gain or
| lose) but after five weeks, the eight-hours group had
| dramatically lower insulin levels and significantly
| improved insulin sensitivity, as well as significantly
| lower blood pressure. The best part? The eight-hours group
| also had significantly decreased appetite. They weren't
| starving."
| ralmidani wrote:
| I can't edit my original comment but I'll try to add some
| nuance:
|
| - When I say "fasting" I mean not eating for a good chunk
| of the day. My Muslim background made me overlook the
| need to define that clearly.
|
| - I doubt most people can sustain fasting indefinitely,
| so "disordered eating" and metabolism going out of whack
| is the most likely outcome.
|
| - If someone has a good reason to fast indefinitely -
| based on professional advice - then they should go for
| it. But, like other extreme measures, it's probably not
| for the general population.
| lucb1e wrote:
| for anyone else confused, that's Primary Care Physician, which
| I take to mean GP/Hausartzt/huisarts.
| ralmidani wrote:
| Thanks for clarifying, and sorry for the confusion - I wish I
| could edit my comment.
| jacknews wrote:
| What is the new writing grip and what were you doing before?
|
| I always assumed dynamic tripod grip was what was taught, and the
| best, as it's how I write, but a couple of my kids used a cross
| between lateral tripod and quadrupod - and their teachers would
| complain about their writing.
|
| I had to restrain myself when I realized this is what they'd been
| taught, and next met the teachers responsible.
| omani wrote:
| ignoring god.
| micheljansen wrote:
| I think I was in my late twenties when I found out I had been
| tying my shoes wrong all my life. There is a correct and an
| incorrect way to do it. This affects not just how the knot looks
| (straight vs crooked), but also how easily it becomes untied:
| https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/theres-a-better-way-to-tie-...
| colordrops wrote:
| This has been a huge game changer for me since I switched as
| well
| [deleted]
| Zecc wrote:
| Since someone is going to point this out, it might as well be
| me:
|
| Ian's Knot [1] not only is super-fast (once you've learned it
| properly), it also ensures you are tying a strong knot.
|
| Also, a heel lock [2] is a independent thing which is also good
| to learn. [1]
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/ianknot.htm [2]
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBbc6TackDQ
| high_byte wrote:
| I LOVE IT
| gorjusborg wrote:
| If you didn't do it, I was going to!
|
| I've taught all of my children to do it this way. Super fast,
| reliable way to tie a square knotted bow.
|
| Though it is somewhat of a misnomer that it is called an 'Ian
| knot', because it isn't a novel knot, rather a technique to
| arrive at one already commonly known.
| jameal wrote:
| Adjacent to this, getting properly fitting shoes. The wrong
| size shoes can cause all kinds of problems for your feet and
| overall musculoskeletal health. There are still stores around
| where they will measure your feet for you and make
| recommendations. Strongly recommend!
| high_byte wrote:
| wow. just go the other way around. very subtle it does feel
| stronger. will have to check it out throughout the day though
| andrewl wrote:
| For more on how to lace and knot shoes, see Iain's Shoelace
| Site:
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/
| digianarchist wrote:
| Great website
| ansible wrote:
| The linked article mentions that the "strong" knot is
| _unlikely_ to come undone.
|
| This knot _will not_ come undone:
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/secureknot.htm
|
| And you can still untie by pulling on one of the ends. Though
| you have to make sure that while untying, you don't allow the
| loop to go over the other end of the shoelace.
| phyzome wrote:
| Yes! This is just about as strong as the standard childhood
| shoelace knot + double-knotting, but it's faster and doesn't
| need to be picked apart. I do get it tangled during the untie
| sometimes, but it's still worth it.
| explorigin wrote:
| I second this. I've been using this knot for years. It's a
| bit tricky to tie but still the best.
| interestica wrote:
| Also, the material type can play a role. I have one pair of
| shoes that will not stay tied. Nike runners with flat laces.
| I'm not sure if the synthetic material just wants to unwind.
| Replaced and have no issues.
| bufordtwain wrote:
| Focussed too much on the technical side of things and not enough
| on the people side of things at work. I'm trying to change this
| but should have done it years ago.
| Arkanosis wrote:
| Shoe lacing. Then I found out Ian's fantastic website:
|
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/grannyknot.htm
|
| Small, but life-changing discovery.
| Mordisquitos wrote:
| After years and years on my mental backlog, having first seen
| it ages ago, I finally started using the Ian Knot ( _World 's
| Fastest Shoelace Knot_) to tie my shoes and similar bow knots:
| https://www.fieggen.com/shoelace/ianknot.htm
| purututu wrote:
| Believing main-stream media when they would say "conspiracy
| theory".
| machiaweliczny wrote:
| Standing. Turns out you shouldn't be standing with locked knees.
| I learned it in my twentees. People with hyperlordosis have
| tendency to do that it seems.
| gongdzhauh wrote:
| I used to be a NIMBY. I thought small neighborhoods that have
| nice characteristics should never evolve or change, I thought
| places with tons of people were unpleasant to live in, I looked
| down on people who could afford market-rate new housing ("evil
| techies"), I thought new development increased rents (it
| doesn't).
|
| 20ish years later, seeing the homelessness, property crime, and
| housing crisis in the Bay Area, I am convinced I was wrong and
| wish that the area had built a ton more housing in the past.
| There used to be so many artists that were able to survive on a
| part-time cafe job back then. That's no longer possible and it's
| a bummer and makes the area so much more mundane.
|
| I do still consider open space and parks important and valuable
| and don't support building new housing on a lot of those types of
| places.
| justin_oaks wrote:
| I read an article I found on HN about how housing regulations
| ensure there is a minimum price on housing. If you can only
| afford housing below the minimum required to meet the
| regulations then you go homeless.
|
| We don't want people homeless but on the other hand, we don't
| want people producing unsafe housing just to keep costs down.
|
| It's a particularly nasty problem that I've only seen discussed
| in that one article.
| ghostpepper wrote:
| This is a general economic argument against any government-
| mandated price control.
|
| People see someone making $6/hour and think that passing a
| law that minimum wage must be $8 means that person will now
| make $8, but technically the law only says "it is now illegal
| to pay that person $6."
|
| Some businesses may be able to afford the raise and still
| turn a profit, but for others, if that person's labor is
| worth $7/hour to your bottom line, it is suddenly no longer a
| good business decision to keep them employed.
| sirmarksalot wrote:
| It all depends on where their wage is on the cost/value
| curve. It's true that if the company is paying their
| employees close to their contributed value, increasing the
| minimum wage will put them out of a job, there often isn't
| a force that reliably pushes a wage near that point.
| Regardless of the value provided, if a company can get away
| with paying their employees less, then they will _. The
| forces that determine wages have more to do with available
| supply of various skills than they do with the demand for
| the actual value provided.
|
| _ not all companies of course, but as an aggregate,
| companies will follow this rule
| zackmorris wrote:
| It's worth noting that without a price floor, people will
| spend all of their time working just to eat. This can be
| seen all around the world in developing countries, for
| example where children shine shoes and scavenge trash to
| recycle for a quarter a day. Meanwhile the wealthy in those
| communities pay merely enough taxes to prevent a revolt.
|
| So the minimum wage is really about deciding what type of
| society we want to live in. Do we want servants, or do we
| want opportunity? In developed countries, jobs below the
| minimum wage get automated or some form of government
| assistance pays for the jobs that can't be, for better or
| worse.
|
| A better word for deregulation might be decivilization.
| slyall wrote:
| In this context "housing regulations" doesn't usually mean
| stuff like electrical standards[1]
|
| It means stuff like "houses must be single story", "no
| apartments", "yards required", "minimum 2500 square feet",
| "setback from street".
|
| [1] - Although I have seen a lot of threads about how the
| requirements for multiple exits in US apartment buildings is
| probably unjustified. See also elevator requirements.
| Dowwie wrote:
| George Carlin presented another solution for housing
| development: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSRCjG-VLk
|
| (2:38min if you want to skip ahead)
| armatav wrote:
| Our homeless crisis is determined by factors unrelated to the
| amount of housing (though it used to be, and it's important to
| build new housing in general) - nowadays we actually _import_
| homeless people to places like SF.
| gongdzhauh wrote:
| Basic supply and demand along with every study I've seen
| points to housing supply being one of and usually the main
| factor in the level of homelessness of a city.
|
| As to San Francisco homeless coming from outside the Bay
| Area, that's true for only around 10% of the population. Most
| (70%) became homeless in San Francisco and many others became
| homeless in other parts of the Bay Area. See the `PLACE OF
| RESIDENCE` section from https://hsh.sfgov.org/wp-
| content/uploads/2020/01/2019HIRDRep...
| armatav wrote:
| 22% - out of county. 8% out of state.
| Self-Perfection wrote:
| For several years since I got my first cell phone I held my cell
| phone during conversations so its top side is on the same level
| as top edge of my ear. Seems neat an logical, right?
|
| Then I realized that I should align its speaker to be right
| against my ear canal, that is 1-2 cm lower. And now I could hear
| the other person so much better!
| jstummbillig wrote:
| Focusing on who is right. On average, when you want to improve
| any given situation, it's a lot less important then it
| intuitively should be.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-30 23:02 UTC)