131–140 of 204 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My mid-50's mother was on quite a long unemployment streak, and I suggested she use realtime ML models to replace her webcam face with a de-aged and improved one. Ageism and being attractive are both real things, like it or not... =/
This sounds like a great idea. Can you share more details about the story? Did she finally get a job?
The article has a bunch of speculation that’s not in the paper: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w35387/w353... One key point: > Nor do I find evidence of upward job mobility among incumbent workers. Already-employed women do not increase hours, income per household member, or job-to-job moves. If anything, employer changes decline, possibly due to a desire to retain access to health insurance that co…
The study also paints this as "kind of unfair against women", but didn't include men at all.
Unfairness found against one segment is not negated by studying only one segment, and “but” is a load-bearing word representing your entire one-word claim. Please explain in more words what argument you’re supporting with your two observations?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Men tend to work in less public facing/social career fields. Your appearance doesn’t matter much if you’re a linesman or a welder; it matters more if you’re doing sales or supporting clients. Probably not the entire story, I think people do have different expectations for men and women, but certainly part of it.
you know a pretty fair majority of men are working in white collar office work, which is directly comparable in terms of public facing and social careers? real loosely, something like 1/3, 40% are in these blue collar fields, and even in those fields there are enough sales and similar roles that prefer better appearances.
For example, even looking solely at the men at my company, our sales reps, marketing lead, and CEO are all more conventionally attractive than our hardware engineers, finance manager, and CTO. And I would say women tend to be at least slightly more likely to wind up in the former positions than the latter (of course we’re speaking in generalities here)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. Part of the reason I was eager to use retatrutide was the reversibility. Fantastic drug and entirely reversible. I self-tested and the effects I had on it were reversed entirely in its absence. Similar to caffeine or amphetamine at the doses I have tried (which are not high), removing the intervention resulted in a return to a prior state over a fairly short period. I'd say that, in general, some of the…
The side effect of drastic muscle loss isn't quickly reversible though. Because muscle is about 3x as expensive to maintain as fat, unless you are on some major strength training to maintain, muscle is the very first thing that your body gets rid of when losing weight. So now you are off the GLP-1. But you also have to eat fewer calories to maintain a calorie deficit because you no longer have all that calorie burnin…
I think there's a lot of just-world fallacy going around re: how I keep running across the following pattern online now that GLP-1RA drugs exist. Commenter A (esp. often a woman, though of any age): I lost a lot of weight and people treat me radically better. I did not change my behavior in a way that explains this; it seems like stigma / prejudice. Commenter B: I have never met you but it is probably the case that s…
Not when I’m clearly bald though
People treat you better when you look better it’s sad but true
I think there's a lot of just-world fallacy going around re: how I keep running across the following pattern online now that GLP-1RA drugs exist. Commenter A (esp. often a woman, though of any age): I lost a lot of weight and people treat me radically better. I did not change my behavior in a way that explains this; it seems like stigma / prejudice. Commenter B: I have never met you but it is probably the case that s…
Why is lookism supposed to be bad/stigma, but favoring intelligent people is good/meritocracy? Both are "unjust" in the sense that they are a result of genetic lottery. If anything, it's the intelligence you are born with that you can't do anything about. Society is better off with more intelligence, but also with more beauty! As we automate intelligence, the selection pressure on good looks will only increase.
Your question elides what “favoring” is in this context.
Outside of a few particular jobs, intelligence better predicts work performance, especially for knowledge work. The point of calling out the stigma of obesity is that it unfairly maligns people who are otherwise capable of contributing to a company.
Lookism is pretty serious, folks. Or whatever you want to call it since that one sounds silly. Maybe a makeover should be suggested more often in job search advice? Work on your hair and diet for a few months before you jump ship and you could have better luck.
Might be different for programmers… my experience is that—broadly speaking—programming ability is inversely proportional to how well dressed you are. I wonder if that is still true, or if I’m just old.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This research already exists though. Obesity and being overweight increases the risk of sleep apnea, strokes, heart disease, diabetes, mental health problems, etc. etc
Causality is an issue there, I would suggest that genetic auto immune issues that are rather wide spread can cause all of the above. I think people are finding that GLP-1s help with auto immune issues.
It's all hyperpalatable foods and the effects of extra adipose tissue are know to be bad for pretty much every health metric under the sun.
Why take drugs when you can take home-delivery diet? This is genuine question, I've started using them and they're one of the best things I've ever paid for. You get good food, at calculated sizes/calories/etc etc, you don't have to do shopping, cooking, cleaning, etc. It is insanely convenient and you can manage your weight easily without even any exercises (but they're still recommended tho)
Usually, chronically-overweight ppl have tried regulating weight with all kinds of diets, lifecycle interventions, regular exercise, etc, and a lot of the time the thing that actually worked was the GLP-1. I think this speaks a lot to the variance in metabolism, hunger, cravings etc across the population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. Part of the reason I was eager to use retatrutide was the reversibility. Fantastic drug and entirely reversible. I self-tested and the effects I had on it were reversed entirely in its absence. Similar to caffeine or amphetamine at the doses I have tried (which are not high), removing the intervention resulted in a return to a prior state over a fairly short period. I'd say that, in general, some of the…
The side effect of drastic muscle loss isn't quickly reversible though. Because muscle is about 3x as expensive to maintain as fat, unless you are on some major strength training to maintain, muscle is the very first thing that your body gets rid of when losing weight. So now you are off the GLP-1. But you also have to eat fewer calories to maintain a calorie deficit because you no longer have all that calorie burnin…
I think your numbers might be per decade, not per year?