yea but we're not in tribes, are we? People take this evolutionary bullshit way too seriously, like we still run around with sticks and stones. None of that crap matters when we live in a modern society. Teenages are going to "socialize with themselves" whether they sleep in or not, no matter what, because, guess what, that's what people do in modern times. They can choose.
What they meant is that we evolved in a way that made teenagers having shifted cycles, going to sleep later and waking up later. We're not living in tribes anymore, but evolution is slow and we still cary these biological traits. It therefore hurts teenagers to wake up as early as adults. The point here is not about leaving them more time to socialize in the evening.
Wouldn't accommodating them make evolution slower? Those that have traits making them able to wake up earlier should be "rewarded" if you want to bring change.
I was trying to comment on the irony in adapting to our evolution instead of the other way around. I wasn't trying to advocate any solution. Clearly it didn't come out right based on the replies I got.
Do you realize you're talking about killing people? Evolution happens when the less fit die or otherwise fail to reproduce. If you want to evolve more nocturnal teenagers, the least unpleasant implication is that you want late sleepers to stay sleep-deprived so they'll die in accidents.
We evolved to be remarkably adaptable species. Our social and environmental conditions influence so much, that there is zero reason to assume that any particular behavior in prehistoric time is fixed and not just adaptation.
Moreover, half of those "past evilutionary people were like this or that" is guess made out of flimsy evidence at best. It is best we have maybe, but not accurate. (For that matter, majority of popular "past people were x" is wrong even for periods where we have a lot of documentation of).
My anecdotal evidence is that when I do sleep at night, eat less and have a regular sex, my body works very well in my 30s. Things change instantly once you lower some grips. Something in me is not just adaptation, but finely tuned core mechanisms. In fact, our current live is very different from what serves well to us. And this is even exploited to large extents – see ads, politics, social irrationality. If it were mere adaptation, then we could be rational and adaptive af.
Depriving people (especially, but not only, adolescents) off their sleep is disastrous for their mental health. For instance ADHD may be linked to lack of sleep (Walker suggests this in his book, I don't know how strongly this is backed by studies). Since by now we know that sleep times are driven by physiological factors to a large degree, I find it inhumane to not take these factors into account in scheduling.
Walker sounds quite sceptical of this story in his book, sleep deprivation may be effective as treatment in some cases, but could be a cause of depression in more cases.
As downvoted as this is, this has a point. People point too much to supposed "innate evolved tendencies" while completely discounting social construction and peer pressure and culture, which are definitely relevant.
Yes but saying "screw the government" on social media today, doesn't really matter if it's going to be applauded in the future, it's still going to be aimed at the government, which is the whole point of the system.
IIRC, they were never deployed to roads. Instead, they were deployed in a pedestrian zone (30 panels or so). It didn't go well, issues included loose panels, failing panels, and a fire in the electronics cabinet.
They are still around, still haven't done anything remotely impressive. These things are idiotic, I say that as someone that backed them way back when. To even remotely be worthwhile you'd need to improve the efficiency percentage several tens of percent.
it is not only about making thinner devices just for the sake. It is also about making energy efficient devices. Current battery tech has not progressed leaps and bounds so I think Apple is trying other ways to make Apple products more energy efficient.
Each symbol of the 11 characters in the plus code is in base 20. There are about 2500 emojis, meaning that you can encode 2 symbols from the plus code with one emoji (20*20=400, if you try to encode 3 symbols, it becomes 8000, which is way more than the current emoji count). So that would become 5 emojis, instead of 11 characters, which in my opinion would look quite nicer.
Given the data Google has, I'm sure they could come up with an efficient encoding scheme that would use far fewer emoji on average by prioritising popular coordinates.
