Hasnain says:

Fairly interesting and accessible read on quantum mechanics and the various interpretations of it. And on how the science has progressed through the years.

“Probing quantum physics is really, really difficult. It is, by necessity, an experimental science far removed from the scale of human experience. But it is also instructive to note that a century of technological progress has not helped answer my question. We essentially know nothing more than Bohr, Einstein, Schrödinger, and Heisenberg did about the actual nature of reality. We have created interesting technologies and philosophical conundrums, but little else. Is it actually possible to find out what the universe is made of?”

Hasnain says:

This was a great short read on process and company culture. I’ll have to revisit this a few times to really internalize it.

“But it’s always worth considering what process makes sufficient, and what you’re really aspiring for. Sometimes adequacy is the goal, but when it’s not, the process is usually the least of it. What are you optimizing for?”

Hasnain says:

“Because of these requirements, most theories about the origin of proteins have either centered on scenarios in extreme environments, such as near hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor, or assumed the presence of molecules like RNA with catalytic properties that could lower the energy barrier enough to push the reactions forward. (The most popular origin-of-life theory proposes that RNA preceded all other molecules, including proteins.) And even under those circumstances, Krasnokutski says that “special conditions” would be needed to concentrate the amino acids enough for polymerization. Though there have been many proposals, it isn’t clear how and where those conditions could have arisen on the primordial Earth.”

Hasnain says:

“But on a population basis, shifting the average IQ down even a small amount could have large consequences, said Sung Kyun Park, an associate professor of epidemiology and environmental health sciences at the University of Michigan School of Public Health. The entire bell curve shifts, he explained, with more of the population at what was once the extreme low end of IQ scores.”

Hasnain says:

I’ve been trying to avoid sharing news recently cause it’s gotten quite depressing, but the concerns being highlighted today are just something else. First this, then the anti LGBTQ bills in Florida, the horrific anti-trans laws being passed in Texas, and Idaho also trying to pass laws making it illegal to get basic healthcare (and banning travel across state lines to do so). When will this end?

“Coleman’s proposal still may succeed in deterring out-of-state abortions, said Myers. Like the Texas law, the proposal itself could have a chilling effect, where doctors in surrounding states stop performing abortions before courts have an opportunity to intervene, worried that they may face a flurry of lawsuits if they violate the law.

Coleman rejects arguments that her law is unconstitutional.

“That’s what they said about the Texas law, and every bill passed to protect the unborn for the last 49 years,” she said.”

Hasnain says:

The linked thread is absolutely infuriating and hilarious at the same time. I’m so glad companies are getting called out on their BS.

“In some cases, the gulf between men and women’s median hourly pay has been as much as 40 percent (see: Missguided, which celebrated IWD by “paying it forward” to customers in cash and asking them for the best advice they’ve received. empowering!). At Young’s Pubs, a pub chain in London, women are paid a shocking 73.2 percent less than men.

Some companies have chosen to delete their tweets entirely rather than face criticism, as in the case of Aston University, where the median hourly pay for women is 25.8 percent lower than men’s. “My alma mater do not like being faced with reality,” one Twitter user noted of the deletion. Another user’s thread collating all the deletions has already over 2,300 retweets.”

Hasnain says:

“If 1,000 deaths a day is not acceptable, what threshold would be? The extreme answer—none!—is impractical, because COVID has long passed the point where eradication is possible, and because all interventions carry at least some cost. Some have suggested that we should look to other causes of death—say, 39,000 car fatalities a year, or between 12,000 and 52,000 flu deaths—as a baseline of what society is prepared to tolerate. But this argument rests on the false assumption that our acceptance of those deaths is informed. Most of us simply don’t know how many people die of various causes—or that it’s possible for fewer to do so. The measures that protected people from COVID slashed adult deaths from flu and all but eliminated them among children. Our acceptance of those deaths never accounted for alternatives. “When was I offered the choice between having a society where you’re expected to go into work when you’re ill or having fewer people die of the flu every year?” Wrigley-Field, the sociologist, said to me.”

Hasnain says:

Love the debugging story here. And I learnt a bunch about operating systems internals from this one.

“After being stuck for more hours, after eliminating everything that was definitely impossible (in my opinion), I drew a conclusion: this must be a kernel bug.

Blaming the Linux kernel (i.e. somebody else’s code) for data corruption must be the last resort. That is unlikely. The kernel is an extremely complex project developed by thousands of individuals with methods that may seem chaotic; despite of this, it is extremely stable and reliable. But this time, I was convinced that it must be a kernel bug.”

Hasnain says:

“The last year has taught me (and many of us) that work won’t love you back and that fixing our individual approaches to it likely won’t prevent burnout. Sometimes the only way to fix a broken system, it seems — to move toward a restorative approach to sustaining ourselves and our labor — is to refuse to play by the old rules. Work is good, but I am not my job.”

Hasnain says:

Slightly cynical take but I found myself nodding along a lot. While I see a bunch of downsides for remote work, I think on the balance there are more positives than negatives and it’s very unfairly maligned. And so this resonated.

“The reason you’re seeing government figures back these spurious arguments is that it’s significantly easier to gaslight and insult remote workers than it is to accept that there are going to be businesses that suffer if people don’t go back to the office. It is true that stores that were profitable based on the existence of office workers will face hard times, but it’s so painfully obvious that this isn’t about “low-income workers. What it’s really about is the capital forces that own the service businesses around offices, along with the powerful real estate moguls that are terrified they won’t be able to sell their expensive leases.

And these forces are extremely good at influencing the media. That’s why you’re seeing the messaging consistently change, from “the office is better than remote work,” to “young people are ruining office culture,” to “remote work is ruining young people’s lives.” They are doing all they can to disenfranchise those who work from home so that they can continue to retain their power.

At the root of almost every part of this argument is denial. Executives don’t want to admit that they truly don’t understand their company, so they say and do whatever they can to undermine anything that makes them feel self-conscious. Eric Adams is in denial that New York City - as with any global financial hub - has to adapt to a partially-remote future. Reporters covering this subject are in denial about how many of their subject matter experts are full of shit, and how many times they’ve been lied to about this subject.

And the victim is the worker. It’s always the worker.”