"But you don't seem to grasp that for many it would have to be a lifelong practice, not just while you drop a few pounds."

I can't comprehend why you believe this.

"You seem quite willing to have others live that way, but you object to even a short period of that level of denying a biological drive for yourself."

I do not know what delusional affliction you have to think this: reaching and maintaining a target weight for me is an ongoing challenge.

What I deny, categorically, is that this is something outside of my control. Gut flora, heredity, environment, you name it, are *all* secondary to my own personal drive and motivation.
A.

"If anything is stupid, it's expecting someone to be successful at denying a basic drive for the rest of their natural life even while giving in to it just enough to be somewhat functional."

I am sorry, but I maintain that living 'just a little bit hungry' (a temporary condition necessary to reduce weight) is not the same - in any reasonable measure - as not breathing. To attempt to equate the two things is to venture into the theater of the absurd, and there is no point in going there.

"Since you seemed unable to comprehend keeping yourself hungry"

What possesses you to think that this is the case? This is *exactly* what I described as 'not easy', but 'doable'.

A.

So you deny that eating is a basic biological drive?"

Are you deliberately trying to look ridiculous?

"Name anyone who died because they kept forgetting to eat."

You're demonstrating your own foolishness. Nobody dies because they forget to eat. Forget to breath (silly as that may be) and you're dead. Attempting to equate these two things is just *stupid*.

A.

I'm sorry, but you are trying to claim that the biological need for calories is the same as breathing. I think this is Absurd. Ridiculous. Stupid. Pick your word, I think it's silly.

A.

"Name any period of time in modern history that any society has found long or even medium term weight loss to be easy."

I at no time said anything was "easy". You're projecting. Again.

A.

You asked me to try something incomparable for a week. What you suggest is not remotely similar to the discussion at hand.

Moreover, I'm not asking others to do *anything*. That's a projection on your part.

Last, but not least, comparing caloric intake to oxygen intake is absurd. Stupid. Ridiculous. Dumb. Words fail me.

A.

" Meanwhile, the level of willpower needed for someone with different gut fauna may be more comparable to sjames' example - beyond that of the typical person."

I grant that it might be possible for the situation you describe to exist, but honestly I believe we have a "culture of failure", e.g. "math is hard", when it comes to personal health.

I read about endless reasons why we will fail to lose weight et al, and I cannot help but consider that we are the victims of our own expectations - we believe it to be hard or impossible so it becomes so.

A.

"Try this: Hold your breath."

What an absurd comparison.

I can reach, and maintain, most any weight goal I choose. I have done this. As I said previously, it is not always *easy*, but it is always doable.

A.

" These days, if I were to teach a kid any language, it would be Python. It has the easy syntax of BASIC with the added advantages of (a) a rich enough API set for everything from web development through machine learning (b) being an actual marketable skill in places like Silicon Valley."

Not to mention that whole "white space is significant" aspect, so as to give them early knowledge of the arbitrary nature of working with business types in the future...

A. (only 1/2 a :-)

"If there is no drive (i.e. "I just want to learn how to 'program'") they will learn nothing."

One should not discount the motivations of others. "I want to learn how" can be just as effective as "I want to mod minecraft" (if not *more* so).

A.

Well, I'm in the 'just eat less' camp. I acknowledge that it may not be easy for everyone, but I can hit whatever weight target I choose simply by making dietary choices.

Make no mistake, I am not claiming that is is always easy - "what, you say I have to stop drinking?", but it is always doable.

A.

Thank you for illustrating the problem so succinctly.

A.

"The truth is. Our present problems are not technical. They are organizational."

I'm sorry, but no. Our present problem is that as a community, people *suck*. There is no technical, organizational, or practical problem keeping us from feeding, housing, or caring for the unfortunate. We just don't *want* to. People suck.

A.

"...but a distribution problem"

I believe you mean well, but using a phrase like this implies we don't know how to distribute our resources, i.e. that is is a technical issue we do not know how to solve. That's not the case - we've been engaging in land wars since the beginning of time - we know how to get stuff where it is needed.

I believe the problem is multi-faceted, but it boils down to:

1) Not my problem
2) Not in my back yard
3) Not with any contribution from me

  - all while sitting complacently on our piles of gold like Smaug.

A.

"Humans are complex machines. Establishing how they work and fixing their faults is a technical problem."

That's one point of view. I prefer this one:

"If there is such a phenomenon as absolute evil, it consists in treating another human being as a thing."
                                -- John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider.

A.