What is the point of posting references to documents you clearly have never even read?

"(b) grant a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021"

This means everyone (+99%) received a full complete unconditional PARDON except for the 14 mostly well known crackpots enumerated above who got time served.

Hundreds of police officers were attacked, 140 of whom received injuries at the hands of the insurrectionist mob. Officers have lost eyes, suffered brain damage and a lady was shot and killed. The appellate process not vigilantism is the proper forum for those who believe they have been mistreated in some way by the justice system. A president with a clear conflict of interest having himself fomented the insurrection in the first place by continuously advertising it and promulgating the "big lie" to crackpot supporters is clearly an abuse of power. There is no justification even if you believe "J6 folks" were mistreated for blanket presidential pardons.

Yes you are. You just demonstrated it by attempting to excuse away the blatantly indefensible with a load of factually incorrect gibberish.

Here's a little more detail.

Researchers a few years back ran tests. ADHDers and neurotypicals were asked to harvest berries and edible plants.

Neurotypicals tended to over-harvest and damage bushes to the point where recovery would be slow if possible at all, and tended to pick areas clean, wiping out local populations of edible plants.

ADHDers tended to move relatively quickly from area to area, harvesting a decent amount from each area but not excessively. The quantities tended to be at the sort of level that have long been established as a good balance, such that plants and populations would tend to actually do better the following year. Not only that, but they tended to gather more.

https://www.psychologytoday.co...

Crofts and small farms rapidly went to three-stage and four-stage crop rotation, but different fields would be with different crops. This meant that the failure of a single crop would be much less of a survival thing.

You'd see fields with a mutitude of diverse crops, because diversity was critical. Failure was highly likely, so you localised it. Failure in one area had no meaningful impact overall. Things like the Irish potato famine and the parsnip failures across France in the 1700s were relatively rare in history. Likewise, when industrialisation wiped out cottage industries, farms that had been very successful suddenly went bankrupt and mass starvation was common. The ability to task-switch and have a large number of small projects going was essential to life at the edges.

You're absolutely right, more ADHD would have indeed curbed the excesses. The industrial revolution caused huge problems by trying to do too much with too little diversity. Which eventually destroyed the economies built around the early mills, because the markets were too easy to undermine. There was no capacity to switch. But during the IR, the obsession with coal meant nobody really looked at alternative fuels or alternative activities. Economies became tightly constricted, which was devastating when it came to global warming, but equally devastating when it came to distributing metal-devouring bacteria (which did enormous damage to infrastructure) and radioactive particles (old mill areas are still unusually radioactive).

More ADHD wouldn't have eliminated the problem, but it would have diversified the solutions and would have diversified the markets, resulting in a much more robust, much healthier marketplace and a much more robust, much healthier population.

Uh, no. As in, 100% of gatherers would be ADHD. IF they weren't, you'd be extinct within the year. 20% of the hunters would also be ADHD, because over-harvesting was also going to wipe out your food source. 100% of your explorers would be ADHD, 100% of your experimenters would be AuDHD.

ADHD was essential to survival. If you didn't want to die out, you stuck the neurotypical outside so that the wolves and other nasties actually hunting (tigers wouldn't be present) would get them. Neurotypicals were the main threat to survival.

Free speech includes lying.

You are anthropomorphizing machines with vastly different properties from humans.

LLMs have no metacognition of any kind. They don't know what grade they were in when they learned anything. They were never a child, teenager or an adult. They never grew up or learned anything from experience. Ordering of inputs has only marginal impacts on model evaluations. Ordering of training while mostly irrelevant to an LLM is critically important to humans.

Pretty much. I live in the Duesseldorf area which has/had it's own little NRW tech-hub mini silicon-valley thing going on. 5 years ago there were multiple really good meetups happening each quarter. An active Google Developer Group, regular well attended Web Development Meetups, a DevOps Network doing the same and even some regular exotic stuff like the pure functional algebrahic development folks meeting up and discussing Scala, Haskell, Elixir and other avant-garde topics.

Companies were eager to pitch in and offer space and catering and I was out and about regularly, enjoying the food and free drinks and getting a hefty dose of nerding off with fellow devs and IT experts.

That all has since completely dried up.

Two years ago I sent out 50+ precisely targeted resumes and had a reaction quota of less than 10%, 5 actual interviews, 3 of them meh to sh1t, two interesting, one of which turned out to be a shady shoddy joint. I joined my current gig which is OK but has me earning 20k less than such a job should reasonably score. My colleagues are leaving left and right and I'm off the team end of September. The last 6 months my coding was basically 95% AI-driven. My last girlfriend has a limited contract and will be out of a job in September too. She bought a garden two years ago and is preparing to go all in on independent homesteading and growing her own veggies out in the easter German boondocks. Demographic decline is starting to show more and more clearly too all around.

I'm not sure what I'm going to do about all this.

I'm somewhat "lucky" in the sense that I live a flexible and minimalist lifestyle and that I'm technically an artist with a performing arts diploma, which is nice and fun but not really worth any significant monetary value. Inflation is palpable, even for a guy like me with some cash to spare and the excessive heatwaves and droughts aren't helping.

A friend of mine has launched multiple businesses throughout the years and is struggling once again after finally gaining some traction a few years back. His liquidity is down to zero and he's just scraping by with the German IRS breathing down his neck. We're going to scout out some derelict houses in southern Europe and see if there's anything meaningful to do and gain there. We're both quickly moving in to a semi-prepper mode. If anything meaningful shall happen on the job market for me, I likely will have to downshift my salary once again and pick some IT janitor / helpdesk type position.

Bottom line: There's a bigger shake-up moving in and I suspect there won't be any well-paying software-dev job for me on the other end of it. The bots are here and they're taking over. It's probably just that simple. That's the Age of Cyberpunk for ya, I guess.

I don't know what "getting absorbed by our culture" even means. My remarks were about labor productivity not stock markets.

"Dead labor" affects labor productivity as does the health of participants in the labor market.

Did you by chance connect the AI to Slashdot so that it can post for you?

Interesting you've chosen a useless "simple" example. Why not instead pick an example of something actually relevant in the real world?

Tower of Hanoi is the same problem as above. No real world value, trivially solved by other means.

Limited seems to be an understatement. Not only does the use case require a trivially checkable objective function it must be a solution that can't be better derived using a different far less costly means.

I never got myself into the whole "masculinity" obsession, even back in the 70s and 80s.

There is and was no wider obscession with masculinity. This is what so many people - women and men - get wrong about masculinity. There is very little in masculinity - even less that with femininity - that is _objectively_ masculine. Most of what constitutes masculinity is in the eye of the beholder. There are guys who think reckless driving, drinking and soccer are "masculine". I for one don't see it.

The narrative also is that men can't express their feelings. Which is complete and utter non-sense. The vast majority of significant art and poetry is done by men. Romanticism was invented by men. We are the romantic sex trying to be rational. And a significant part of being a man is tapping into the inner flame of poetry in whatever the man does and gaining an emotional resonance and depth that is independent of the whims of hetero-dynamic relationships. Escapism is a good fallback if society around you limits everything else. Which it tends to do.

Bottom line: You did the right thing. And masculinity-wise too.

No, it's more likely that girls and women learned to mask symptoms early for survival reasons.

If you look at hunter-gatherer societies, ADHD is paramount to survival because it avoids over-harvesting. Too little ADHD produces cultures prone to driving plants and/or animals extinct. ADHD is a critical stop-gap that prevents this. Studies show ADHD gatherers will not only collect more, they will do so in ways that cause far less damage, resulting in a far better second harvest and far better sustainability.

Into more modern times, ADHD was a valuable survival trait. Too little and you became vulnerable to diseases, pests, crop blight, etc. If you wanted a stable population, right the way through to the industrial era, you needed a high level of ADHD in the population.

It is only when neurotypical bosses decided that they had to micromanage everything and decided who lived and who died on the streets that you see ADHD symptoms suddenly and massively suppressed. But masking changes nothing. The levels will still be the same, they're just hidden.

It isn't. The under-diagnosis of girls is astronomical.

You are assuming ADHD is a new thing. No, it isn't. It is a survival thing. ADHD was critical in a very large percentage of the population for the bulk of the last 350,000 years. Without it, humanity would have gone extinct. It's merely not appropriate in a world in which neurotypicals make neurodiverse solutions a "bad thing".

They might drop by a little, but honestly not by much. Boys are mildly overdiagnosed for the reasons you give (but few places still medicate), girls are however massively underdiagnosed.

I never got myself into the whole "masculinity" obsession, even back in the 70s and 80s. The result of this was a discovery that computers launched me head-first through far fewer windows and pelted me with far fewer rocks. So, yeah, I was definitely seen as disposable though my childhood and teen years by pretty much everyone. (It's one reason anyone looking back at those as "golden years" is unlikely to win me over.)

Escapism is pretty much all I had at the time, and these days remains pretty much all I have - reality has grown far worse over the years and knowledge by the neurotypicals has not come with empathy but ammunition. There is guilt and shame in playing with creative writing or inventing, and the demons have got really bad on occasion, but you're right, it's not doing anyone any harm.

You're correctly describing a phenomenon. However, that has nothing to do with ADHD and everything to do with gyno-centric social dynamics that - by sheer evo-psych - looks for ways to exploit men. This is how cultures grow and develop. There's quite a bit of research on that (neatly sidelined by contemporary mainstream femnoise).

Bottom line: The problem you describe is a fundamental one that exists for ADHD males as it does for "regular" males. It's only that ADHD males are perhaps more sensitive to these dynamics. That's why there is a solid amount of evidence that male ADHD in particular actually is an advantage for populations, because it forces those men to leave the beaten path and explore new ground. The 'rebel' gene of ADHD is a useful vector for discovering new paths for a given population/society.

Both. It's best thought of as a positive feedback loop.