Notice the age range is 65 or older. There is a large cohort of Boomers/GenX/Millenial drinkers who are aging up. The overall downtrend is that younger people are not starting to drink. But those who contributed to the initial rise are getting older.
I imagine that would be one positive effect of endless entertainment being ubiquitous- since people can zone out in front of a screen with any entertainment medium of their choosing, they are less likely to opt for alcohol.
Though interestingly, drunk driving fatalities are rising despite lowering alcohol consumption[1], even discounting the pandemic contriting large jumps up. So of the people that do drink, they're more likely to drive after doing so? It seems like an interesting topic to study.
Anecdotally the drinking culture that existed for me in my youth has completely disappeared. House parties, a staple of my college years, are nonexistent. Talking to recent grads from the same school, their social life looks very different.
I think this is connected to social media but in a different way. Young people are very aware that any deviant behavior will be recorded and posted. Also they are deathly afraid of being "cringe."
Talking to some recent grads (last few years) last summer, parties were pretty much confined to frat parties. The school had a very vibrant house party scene circa 2010, but it sounded dead even pre-Covid. The people I talked to were at a music festival, so high cross over with those who would have attended the parties, not those who spent college locked in a dorm. I was very shocked to hear the difference in experience with within a decade.
This would be a true test of can LLMs innovate or just regurgitate. I think part of people's amazement of LLMs is they don't realize how much they don't know. So thinking and recalling look the same to the end user.
Does this 5% include people who have fallen out of the unemployed bucket into some sort of long term bucket? I know multiple people who have been looking for 6 months+. Not to mention underemployed.
It never has. The labor force participation rate for 25-54 year-olds is a better metric for such things.[1] Last time it was this high was 1990s through 2002. (Before that, it was never this high.)
The shape of that graph is roughly equivalent to the shape of labor force participation for women [1]. I don’t think that detracts from your point in regards to the last 20-30 years, but in regards to “before that it was never this high” I think it’s evident that the societal shift of women joining the workforce is the reason, not an improvement in the economy.
Nah, you'll just be on it for the rest of your life. Drug companies prefer chronic illnesses since they cannot be cured, and recipients take the drug for life. All these hormones (GLP, testosterones, hrt) will need to be taken forever. Very few people come off GLP-1 and keep weight off.
I mean, obesity is a chronic illness, so is hypogonadism. If your balls don't work they don't work.
Chronic illnesses require chronic medication. The same is true even WITHOUT the medication. If you're obese and want to lose the weight, you need to manage your diet and exercise. Forever. Until the day you die. You can't ever stop that or you'll be obese again.
Some things just don't have one-time solutions, and that's okay.
Gilead has made bank on Solvadi, a drug that cures a previously-chronic disease [1].
> Very few people come off GLP-1 and keep weight off
Rebound can be close to 100% if you’re severely obese, but for most people it’s much less [2]. (Everyone I know who was taking it two years ago is off it, and they eat and exercise healthier than they did.)
Eating healthier for a while itself will reduce your palette for these foods, and make normal food taste better.
If you limit your sugar intake for a bit, American bread becomes quite the tasty treat.
It might not be direct action of the medication, but the medication making it easier to fix your habits can have huge dividends, similar to how giving an ADHD person stimulant meds make them less likely to die from misadventure or substance use because they self medicate less.
I think AI as a tool versus AI as a product are different. Even in coding you can see it with tab completion/agents v vibe coding. It's a spectrum and people are trying to find their personal divider on it. Additionally there are those out there that decry anything involving AI as heresy. (no thinking machines!)
This is exactly the sort of refusal to comprehend so that you can get in an "um, ackshually" that the op is talking about. He's quoting a line from a book as a metaphor for a concept the book illustrates well.
You see someone who you think has missed a larger point, and all you can muster as a reply is a vague jab and unexplained reference? Do you not see the irony? Your whole comment is an “um, ackshually”, the very thing you are decrying.
I didn’t enjoy Dune, by the way. No shade on those who did, of course, but I couldn’t bring myself to finish it.
If you think there’s something there, explain your point. Make an argument. Maybe I have misunderstood something and will correct my thinking, or maybe you have misunderstood and will correct yours. But as it is, I don’t see your comment as providing any value to the discussion. It’s the equivalent of a hit and run, meant to insult the other person while remaining uncommitted enough to shield yourself from criticism.
It's an old saying. The ability for submarines to move through water has nothing to do with swimming, and AIs ability to do generate content has nothing to do with thinking.
The quote (from Dijkstra) is that asking whether machines think is as uninteresting as asking whether submarines swim. He's not saying machines don't think, he's saying it's a pointless thing to argue about - an opinion about whether AIs think is an opinion about word usage, not about AIs.
Are you hitting tab because it’s what you were about to type, or did it “generate” something you don’t understand? Seems a personalized distinguisher to me.
Until your spouse/SO/sister/mother/girlfriend spurns a LEO, and then the LEO uses it to stalk and harass them. Talk to any LEO, they constantly misuse their data access to look up friends/family/neighbors to find dirt. Most of the time its relatively harmless gossip, but it can easily be used to harass people.
These tools tend to be very expensive in my experience unless you are running your own monitoring cloud. Either you end up sampling traces at low rates to save on costs, or your observability bill is more than your infrastructure bill.
We self host Grafana Tempo and whilst the cost isn’t negligible (at 50k spans per second), the money saved in developer time when debugging an error, compared to having to sift through and connect logs, is easily an order of magnitude higher.
Doing stuff like turning on tracing for clients that saw errors in the last 2 minutes, or for requests that were retried should only gather a small portion of your data. Maybe you can include other sessions/requests at random if you want to have a baseline to compare against.
Try open-source databases specially designed for traces, such as Grafana Tempo or VictoriaTraces. They can handle the data ingestion rate of hundreds of thousands trace spans per second on a regular laptop.
I like to write them on my own in every company Im in using bash. So I have a local set of bash commands to help me figure out logs and colorize the items I want to.
Takes some time and its a pain in the ass initially, but once I've matured them - work becomes so much more easy. Reduces dependability on other people / teams / access as well.
Edit: Thinking about this, they wont work in other use cases. Im a data engineer so my jobs are mostly sequential.
I have seen pushback on this kind of behavior because "users don't like error codes" or other such nonsense. UX and Product like to pretend nothing will ever break, and when it does they want some funny little image, not useful output.
A good compromise is to log whenever a user would see the error code, and treat those events with very high priority.
We put the error code behind a kind of message/dialog that invites the user to contact us if the problem persists and then report that code.
It’s my long standing wish to be able to link traces/errors automatically to callers when they call the helpdesk. We have all the required information. It’s just that the helpdesk has actually very little use for this level of detail. So they can only attach it to the ticket so that actual application teams don’t have to search for it.
> I have seen pushback on this kind of behavior because "users don't like error codes" or other such nonsense […]
There are two dimensions to it: UX and security.
Displaying excessive technical information on an end-user interface will complicate support and likely reveal too much about the internal system design, making it vulnerable to external attacks.
The latter is particularly concerning for any design facing the public internet. A frequently recommended approach is exception shielding. It involves logging two messages upon encountering a problem: a nondescript user-facing message (potentially including a reference ID pinpointing the problem in space and time) and a detailed internal message with the problem’s details and context for L3 support / engineering.
I used «powermetrics» bundled with macOS with «bandwidth» as one of the samplers (--samplers / -s set to «cpu_power,gpu_power,thermal,bandwidth»).
Unfortunately, Apple has taken out the «bandwidth» sampler from «powermetrics», and it is no longer possible to measure the memory bandwidth as easily.
> UX and Product like to pretend nothing will ever break, and when it does they want some funny little image, not useful output.
Just ignore them or provide appeasement insofar that it doesn’t mess with your ability to maintain the system.
(cat picture or something)
Oh no, something went wrong.
Please don’t hesitate to reach out to our support: (details)
This code will better help us understand what happened: (request or trace ID)
Nah, that’s easy problem to solve with UX copy. „Something went wrong. Try again or contact support. Your support request number is XXXX XXXX“ (base 58 version of UUID).
I used to share a similar sentiment about speed, especially after having burned out hard around 30. But after recovering, I think I may have overcorrected. Momentum is very powerful, and it's hard to gain momentum at low speed.
Speed is important but going fast doesn't mean going as fast as possible. It's about going fast sustainably. Work speed isn't binary. You can be fast without being the fastest.
reply