m0darn

It took me about a year and a half to go from having a diagnosis to actually doing anything about it. Like it took my career going off the rails to take the diagnosis from the specialist to my family doctor.

My wife was skeptical at first, but now is very supportive. And to be fair it was about 10 years between my first inkling and the diagnosis so I suppose it's fair to say that I was also skeptical at first.

I'm now on my second medication and in counseling. I'd say it's only kinda working. The most effective thing has been to set things up to take advantage of urgency/accountability.

It was a meme version of this article which caused me to seek a formal diagnosis.

https://themighty.com/topic/adhd/icnu-william-dodson-adhd-motivation/

Not something I have any experience with but please allow me opine from my armchair:

the only problems I forsee with that approach are:

-- any bends you might have to navigate -- supporting/stabilizing the new pipe -- sealing the top to prevent a down draft forming between them and pulling exhaust into your home

I really appreciate you engaging in more than just one liners.

I disagree, the Abaya is not just a flowing robe.

It is a garment that is required by the Sharia law (see Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries where women are not allowed to choose what they wear).

From le Monde

[Saudi Arabia] Since 2022 (...) has outlawed the wearing of abaya for women during examinations.

It is not a religious garment. It is a cultural garment. You're right that it is often worn by Muslim women/girls to achieve islamic notions of modesty. But it's predominately worn by people strongly influenced by Arab culture, not muslims everywhere.

I agree that countries should not generally be dictating what people are allowed to wear.

Allowing this is the first step in letting religion in the public schools in France, where it has always been explicitly banned.

Except it's not the first step in letting religion in schools. It was already allowed and then was banned. The pendulum is swinging away from religious tolerance. It would be more accurate to view the ban as the next step in a series of measures further disembracing France's ethnic minorities.

And it is very unlike banning rainbows, those are a symbol used to promote acceptance of the diversity of others

So you support symbols of the acceptance of the diversity of others. But you do not support actual acceptance of cultural diversity.

ever notice how religion is closely tied with extremism?

Yes. Too many religions have dark histories/presents.

Another factor to take into account is that these young girl may be forced by their family to wear such a garment, imposing upon them something they may not be old enough to refuse.

I think the best way to help people in situations like this is to get them into environments where they can make strong relationships with people outside their family's religion. Like public schools.

Also, look up the paradox of intolerance, as allowing anyone to do as they please causes the rise of extremism.

I'm familiar with the concept and agree that limitations to freedom are necessary to protect freedom. But is it intolerance to wear an Abaya or is it intolerance to forbid unfamiliar styles of clothing?

I applaud France's goal of a secular society. But I think this policy is a misstep.

Look at images of abaya compared to duster cardigans and maybe you'll see what I mean.

The rule isn't no flowing robes.

The rule is "no flowing robes on kids suspected of being muslim".

An Abaya is just a flowing robe.

This ban is like an American school saying you're allowed to wear cowboy hats but not sombreros because sombreros are associated with catholicism, in that they are mostly associated with the culture of a predominately catholic country.

This is like banning kids from wearing rainbows because it signifies their values.

If you're doing it to learn about electronics and physics it's a great thing to do.

Tinkering is fulfilling in and of itself.

You may be interested in the Kelvin Water Dropper.

I don't like this weird culture of paying people different wages for the same jobs.

Ideally people would be paid the value of their labour. People with the same job often have different labour values. So that's a good reason for people to have different pay for the same job. A roofer that can lay more shingles, waste less material to bad cuts, and build roofs that don't need leak in the warranty period deserves to be paid a lot more than one that is slow, wasteful and sloppy.

But there are also bad reasons for people to get paid more for the same job. Eg Skin colour, height, corporate bullshitting, gender.

I agree compensation transparency is good but I don't think the answer is new hires snooping on people's pay stubs.

I seem to recall Diogenes replied:

Likewise: if I were not Diogenes I too would wish I were Diogenes

I mean it's all probably made up but what a guy.

Yeah I think I was in a stupor when I commented. I don't think I even tried to understand your comment. My apologies. But now that I am trying, I am struggling to understand the notation.

Well what about the fact that after 34 people the entire population is tied to the tracks. What are the chances that one person out of 35 wants to destroy humanity?

Also thing the entire human population to the tracks is going to cause some major logistical problems, how are you going to feed them all?