forloop

6 ms·

151.
The brain game: How decreased neural activity may help you learn faster(sciencedaily.com)
1 points by forloop 11y ago|0 comments
152.
Promoting Health and Longevity Through Diet(cell.com)
64 points by forloop 11y ago|20 comments
153.
Democracy v Psychology: why people keep electing idiots(theguardian.com)
4 points by forloop 11y ago|0 comments
154.
Fertility Is Kaput, but Life Goes On(joshmitteldorf.scienceblog.com)
36 points by forloop 11y ago|13 comments
155.
How Genetic Engineering Can Make Us Look Like Bodybuilders Naturally (2013)(whatisgenetic.com)
2 points by forloop 11y ago|0 comments
156.
Houseplants Make You Smarter (2011)(scientificamerican.com)
1 points by forloop 11y ago|0 comments
157.
Sushi parasite inspires worm test for cancer(newscientist.com)
2 points by forloop 11y ago|0 comments
158.
Is Google working on a cure for cancer?(telegraph.co.uk)
3 points by forloop 12y ago|0 comments
159.
San Francisco 49ers Linebacker Retires at 24 Over Head-Trauma Fears(nymag.com)
1 points by forloop 12y ago|0 comments
160.
A Contrarian in Biotech(technologyreview.com)
1 points by forloop 12y ago|0 comments
161.
by forloop 12y ago
Say a 10xer is 30, and the average lifespan is 80 years. If ageing could be halved, then the remaining 50-year-left-pre-intervention results in 100 years of life. But has there already be any substance which has doubled lifespan? Yes[0]! In
162.
by forloop 12y ago
1) This sounds like rationalisation. Clearly there's advantages to being 10x at something valuable. 2) The premise of the 10xers not being around in 50-100 years could be correct. It depends on the amount of money invested in anti-agei
163.
Fact or Fiction: Childfree Couples Are Happier Than Couples with Kids (2011)(psychologytoday.com)
6 points by forloop 12y ago|2 comments
164.
by forloop 12y ago
> So your statement hints at the science of philosophy, and what constitutes proof That should say 'philosophy of science'... Proofread, ftw!
165.
by forloop 12y ago
Testing substances on healthy humans is a big deal. At the moment nootropics are used only in disease models. Also, the creation of nootropics which offer greater upgrades to cognition should be a priority. There have been a few promising
166.
by forloop 12y ago
Thought you may say that. How is something in medicine proven? It's not with deduction, it's with induction! So nothing in medicine is proven with 100% certainty. What's left is probability! Even as an anonymous nobody, I&#x2
167.
by forloop 12y ago
> That depends on what actual results you can deliver. Nothing to do with me. I plan on purchasing the results. > If it's not very much, that's not a fallacy, it's a demonstration. Rats' lifespans have been doubled
168.
by forloop 12y ago
I hope Peter encourages start-ups in longevity and nootropics. Or just nootropics. If there's more smart people then additional anti-ageing tech will follow—since all arguments against said tech are fallacious; even if they seem reason
169.
by forloop 12y ago
> Maybe, once the DWP's contract with Monster expires in a few years, gov.uk will be able to make a case that they should be running it. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation based on what you said previously. If you read
170.
by forloop 12y ago
> I have no idea why you're attacking gov.uk for it - I repeat, they had literally nothing to do with it. I'm answering your questions as frankly as I can. The questions involve gov.uk, and so the answers involve gov.uk. > g
171.
by forloop 12y ago
So your question relates to whether it makes a difference to me if the job search app is available via gov.uk? No it doesn't. From the outside it's all bullshit branding. As a user I want to be able to find jobs, refine searches,
172.
by forloop 12y ago
The marginal benefit—above and beyond other options—of Universal Jobmatch is so low (and probably negative) that it doesn't matter either way. Being mandated to use a suboptimal tool results in a net loss. Taking that into consideratio
173.
by forloop 12y ago
> They have a form on gov.uk which submits to the job search application from direct.gov (the organisation that was bad enough to convince government to give gov.uk a go in the first place). That validates my concern about quality.
174.
by forloop 12y ago
The Monster.co.uk main site is better. They still aren't held accountable to the market. Being for-profit per se is the wrong distinction! Free market may be more apt. That explains why there's so many jobs from Monster on there.
175.
by forloop 12y ago
It's almost certainly a modification, if it is New Transport. After all, what makes a road sign readable is different from body copy. But that's an interesting comment! Aside: I've probably been past the road sign on that Wik
176.
by forloop 12y ago
Not really. Defensible facts.
177.
by forloop 12y ago
I was using the job search[1] on the gov.uk domain yesterday, and the UX is extremely poor! If the job site was a for-profit, it would probably be put out of business by competitors! But, since the government can jail people for not handing
178.
by forloop 12y ago
Paywall.
179.
Treadmill Performance Predicts Mortality(hopkinsmedicine.org)
66 points by forloop 12y ago|25 comments
180.
by forloop 12y ago
> There is no higher social benefit to life extension, at least none that I can see. One benefit would be people thinking increasingly about the long-term; which has implications for things like global warming and wars. > It's a

More ›