Everyday Junglist
Bio
Practicing mage of the natural sciences (Ph.D. micro/mol bio), Thought middle manager, Everyday Junglist, Boulderer, Cat lover, No tie shoelace user, Humorist, Argan oil aficionado. Occasional LinkedIn & Facebook user
Stories (552/0)
Argan Oil Does Not Cause Acne
All 29 members of Morocco's International Association of dermatology held a joint press conference today in which they announced the results of a Moroccan clinical trial aimed at determining if heavy use of argan oil, the wildly popular hair and beauty oil, and cornerstone of Morocco's economy, was to blame for a marked rise in acne globally. Harvard medical trained Dr. Abdel Adir, head of the Moroccan dermatological society with 30+ years experience as a practicing dermatologist in Morocco said the following in announcing the results. "The results of the first ever case controlled double blind randomized clinical trial looking for an association between the use of argan oil with acne proved what Moroccan's have already known for ages, argan oil does not cause acne. In fact our data suggests that heavy use of argan oil may actually have a protective effect. It is well established science that argan oil leaves the skin smooth and moisturized without feeling greasy or oily." Aksed to comment on a potential mechanism for this acne protecting effect, Dr. Adir continued. "We have hypothesized that argan oil works to prevent acne by gently coating skin pores with a naturally clean and antimicrobial oil. Once covered in a smooth film of argan oil, skin pores are prevented from future clogging by dirtier, less effective at leaving hair lustrous and soft but not greasy oils, like coconut or whatever the flavor of the month beauty oil happens to be. Once again argan oil proves why it is the superior choice for your hair, skin, nails, and overall health. These days it is all too easy to become overwhelmed by the sheer number of beauty focused oils clogging the products on store shelves. Never forget, these other oils are also clogging your skin pores, causing acne, and maybe even cancer." When some reporters raised the possibility of bias on the part of the Moroccan dermatological society Dr. Adir reacted angrily saying "I don't respond to questions clearly planted by members of the coconut oil association. They can take their coconuts and plant them where the sun don't shine." With that, he turned and walked away.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Blush
Kitten Picture Hoarder
One of my very good friends happens to be a cat breeder. Her specialty is oriental short hairs, and, in addition to breeding, is a regular at regional and national cat shows. She is fairly well known in the cat show circuit (not a very big but an extremely odd world) and a few of her treasured felines are heavily decorated champions. Her cattery is a business but it is a consistent money loser. Breeding and raising cats the right way is very expensive and even when your kittens can sell for upwards of $1,000 it is virtually impossible to turn a profit. Like almost all breeders (I wish I could say all but of course there are a few bad apples ) she is in it solely for the love of the cats and the breed. I have had the great pleasure of spending a considerable amount of time with some of her charges and they are very special indeed. I have also helped her on occasion with sales and with transfers and transport of kittens and cats between various breeders and buyers. If you are interested to learn more about the exciting world of cat transfers I’ve provided a link here about a particularly interesting case. It is a pretty funny story, truly, read it, now, go, go read it, please.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Petlife
If the Simulation Hypothesis is Correct We are All AIs
Author’s note: I have no way to authenticate the origin of the following as it arrived by email from an unknown sender three days ago with no explanation. It had the subject line of Simulatio Dubitabam (Latin for Simulation Skeptic) followed by the title of this post you see above. It was quite short and ended suddenly.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Futurism
- Top Story - August 2022
Deprioritizing Email Has Greatly Improved My Work Productivity and Overall Job SatisfactionTop Story - August 2022
For as far back as I can remember in my career the first thing I did everyday upon arriving to work was check and respond to email, it was also the last thing I did before I left each day. It was also the thing I did regularly throughout the day each day of each workweek. Checking and responding to emails has always been at the very top or very near the top of my priority list at work. The portion of my work time I spend checking and responding to emails grew each year, and seemed to neatly mirror my own growth within the business where I worked. As my responsibilities grew so did the size of my inbox. I prided myself at keeping my inbox and unread emails at or near zero and always responding promptly to each and every message no matter how unimportant or trivial. In recent years as the flood of emails reached record levels I devised ever more complicated systems of rules for prioritizing, categorizing, organizing, and storing emails into folders and subfolders, groups, and subgroups. I asked colleagues to explain their even more complicated systems so that I might learn from them and mimic their best ideas. It was an ongoing, uphill, seemingly never ending, battle against an enemy whose numbers were never depleted, and in fact mustered more troops to the field each and every day. I was just one man going toe to toe against this ever growing onslaught of emails and I was determined to never give up, never surrender. All of this effort was undertaken with one overarching goal in mind, maximizing the number of emails I could receive and respond to in the shortest possible amount of time, and always in priority order. Typically that meant that priority was assigned based on the senders rank within the particular business within which I worked, with those higher up the chain being prioritized above those below. Special deference would always be given to my direct manager, who's emails (almost) always took priority over anything else from anyone in the organization, including my own direct reports. Failing to respond within hours was shameful, failing to respond in the same day an unmitigated disaster, not responding at all, well, let's just say some things were downright unthinkable.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Confessions
The Downsides of Data Driven Decision Making
In life, and especially in business it is quite fashionable these days to hear people claim that they make "data driven decisions." Making data driven decision sounds like a very smart thing to do. Certainly much smarter than its regular language translation, "using the facts to determine a course of action" which sounds awfully obvious and boring. Definitely not something one would see published in the Harvard Business Review. Despite its obviousness it would seem hard to argue with the sagacity of making "data driven decisions", after all who would not want to use all of the information at one's disposal (data) in deciding which to select of the many possible alternative options that are available (decision making) for doing whatever it is one is trying to do? Usually that thing one is trying to do is make money or some derivative thereof. Nothing gets me more fired up for an argument than a thing which is hard to argue with. Therefore, below I present to you two arguments against data driven decision making. Of course I am in general a big supporter of data driven decision making and in no way mean to suggest that it is not (most of the time) the smartest way to go about making decisions in just about any aspect of one's life or career. However, that said, it is by no means guaranteed to be the best way to make decisions or even the smartest way to make decisions in every case. As you will see if you continue on, data driven decision making has at least two highly relevant downsides that can make it the less than optimal mechanism for deciding things. Even if less than optimal in some specific instances, it is still likely never a bad way to make a decision, it just won't guarantee that you always come out on top. Nothing ever does though does it?
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in The Swamp
Ten By Ten
It took quite a long time before anyone was able to piece together what had happened, what was still happening. We now know that on Dec. 3, 2027 at approximately 10pm the formerly dead started coming back in spirit form, as ghosts, to use the vernacular. Not just the recently deceased either, but all of them, all of the dead, everyone who had ever died on planet earth, at any time since the dawn of consciousness in man (or thereabouts), had come back as a ghost. These ghosts were of the particularly frustrating, annoying and sometimes, though infrequently, deadly variety. They had a knack for releasing piercing wails at all hours of the day or night, scratching or biting the still living, and any other number of habits all seemingly designed to irritate, bother, and generally make living with or near them, downright impossible. And, unfortunately, as you might imagine, there were quite a lot of them. Estimates put the number at greater than 100 billion. For comparison the earth's population at the time of the rising was right around 7 billion. The dead outnumbered the living by a little over ten to one. The excess of ghosts to living humans has increased significantly since that time, mostly as a result of the actions of the ghosts themselves, but also, that of the living, and how we reacted to them.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Fiction
I'm Sorry Vocal But 8 Days to Publish a Story is Not Acceptable
Actually make it 8 days..... screen shot showing 8 days and counting Below in quotes is copied text from the Vocal help section describing their policy with respect to story publication times. This information was posted 2 years ago. Highlighting with italics/bolding are my own
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Filthy
To Be Honest
There are a number of specific phrases that lying persons are said to use when exaggerating the truthfulness of their spoken or written words. One of the most commonly mentioned of these is the phrase “to be honest.” The use of this particular phrase reveals an overemphasis on truthfulness which is often listed as an indicator that someone is lying. Recently a friend called me out during a discussion for using the phrase, and suggested I was likely lying because of it. I am no different than any other human being alive, and cannot claim that I never have, or never do, lie, however in this case I was being perfectly honest (and there I go again overemphasizing my truthfulness, am I lying about not lying? No I am not.) Later I caught myself using the phrase again in an email and again, in that particular case, I was not lying, or dissembling, or misleading in any way.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Psyche
We Have Finally Arrived In Our Partially Simulated Universe
Today we continue our exploration of the partial simulation by trying to figure out what the heck to do next. As you may recall if you have read any of my earlier posts on this topic we have finally arrived at what I believe to be a very likely (perhaps even the most likely) of situations if indeed we are living in a (partial) simulation. Remember it must be partial because of the ‘too good to be true’ problem which I currently believe is a fatal flaw in all total simulation hypotheses I have yet encountered. Notice I say currently as I am prepared to be convinced otherwise by a strong argument as to why it is not. Until that time I maintain that the most likely scenario is that the universe is 50–75% simulated and we are living in it as 100% real beings (assuming a simulation hypothesis of any type is actually correct). So the fuck what, is what I am now asking myself and perhaps you are thinking along similar lines.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Futurism
Thinking About Constraints On Partially Simulated Universe Scenarios
If we can accept the possibility that the universe and/or ourselves may be partial simulations it is easy to be quickly overwhelmed by the various possibilities that might arise and their implications. Not only do we have a quantitative value (% simulation vs % real with possible values of the smallest amount of simulation that is greater than zero to the largest amount of simulation that is less than 100) we also have three possibilities for what is partially simulated; ourselves, the universe, or some combination of both. if we have any hope of evaluating the possibilities and implications of partial simulations I think it necessary to try and focus our efforts on the most likely scenarios. To that end I have been thinking about how we might whittle them down to at least a smaller number of the most reasonable scenarios. As with all writings on this topic if I and you are simulations and/or are living in a simulation then these words, the fact that I am writing them down here and now, may very well have been programmed into me or the universe from before I was ‘born’. If that is the case I say “fuck off simulators, you all can bite me.” You think that was programmed in? If it was then I will grant that our hypothetical simulators have an excellent sense of humor and very good taste indeed.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Futurism
Accounting Rules Stifle Innovation
The system today "According to the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, require that most research and development costs be expensed in the current period." For as long as their have been accounting rules the idea that R&D activities must be entered on the costs side of the ledger has held sway. To my knowledge none or only a very few have ever dared question the wisdom of this approach. After all, it seems obvious, R&D (in its most basic form) costs money, it does not make money, not directly at least. If it does make money it is only indirectly through the products and services that eventually come to market as a result of the money spent on R&D. Much like a building or other capital expense, R&D is viewed as a tool that can be used to make money, but not as a money making enterprise in an of itself. A building, however, is built, and maybe modified some over time, but it does not really do anything. Not anything active at least. It just exists, and is used by a business which occupies it to conduct business, to facilitate the doing of business. In the end it just sits there and does nothing but "exist as a building" On the other hand, R&D, some activities of which can be capitalized like a building (see linked article above for the gory details) is a very active thing (hence the reason we call it an activity or a process). It does much more than just "exist as R&D" waiting for some business to occupy it and use it to make money. Their are alternative R&D models of course that do exist, some of which set up R&D as a profit making enterprise with its own P&L, but these are few and far between and are typically highly risk averse, short term project focused, and significantly limited in scope. Nothing wrong with that model and it can be useful, but it is far from the norm and if all R&D were set up in this manner it is hard to see how real "move the needle" type innovation could actually happen.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in The Swamp
The Standard Simulation Hypothesis (SH1) And Transhumanist Thought
I can’t believe this had not really crossed my mind until now but the standard simulation hypothesis (SH1, both the universe and ourselves are simulations, i.e we are simulated beings living in a simulation), and almost any variant thereof, save perhaps a partial, poses some serious difficulties for the transhumanist position. In particular its most common thesis that human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into different beings with abilities much surpassing those we have at present. The difference in abilities will be so great that we will no longer be human but instead become posthuman beings. A common version of this suggests that at some point our technology will become so powerful that we will be able to download “ourselves” into a computer and thus achieve eternal life in the digital domain without the need of a physical body.
By Everyday Junglist2 years ago in Futurism