231–240 of 340 posts
using `Ctrl + r` in your shell, I just hope someone reading this doesn't know it yet :-)
To anyone that has use for this, I also recommend trying the fish shell. It takes some getting used to at first but the sheer time save I realize with just autocomplete is monumental!
using `Ctrl + r` in your shell, I just hope someone reading this doesn't know it yet :-)
It’ll copy the text in your current command line into your $EDITOR. Saving and quitting your editor will put the modified text back into your command line. Never fear long commands again!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does it count if you lie awake in bed for an hour unable to sleep because of rumination? Because in that case, I'm sure plenty of people do it at some point. Heh, shit, if that counts I "meditate" for an hour or more a couple times a week. It's absolutely horrible. [EDIT] in fact, running with that, most of my life has been a struggle to "meditate" less for the sake of my own health and sanity. I'm way down from th…
I don't think it is. I think meditation is about stopping the rumination by being present, doing something like focusing on your breath. If your mind starts to wander/ruminate then you catch your self and return your thought to being present. It is hard
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or cutting extraneous expenses. It's cliche, but really, making your own coffee and packing lunch can save $20-25 a day. That adds up fast.
This is true, but it's also a good thing to go to lunch or have coffee with other people. You'll get personal enjoyment out of it, and if you are talking shop, the relationship you build could offset the savings of packing your own lunch. For example it's common that you will regularly have lunch with a work colleague, and then later they will recruit you to work at another company. Or they will give you insight on h…
Assuming A actually causes B:
Can A alone cause/explain B? (sufficiency)
Can anything else also cause/explain B other than A? (necessity)
There's a lot more than that, but those are the basics and they'll get you far with critical thinking. Pretty much any logical fallacy in those never-ending "lists of logical fallacies" can be rephrased in terms of causality, necessity, and sufficiency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way 401k retirement accounts are set up in the US, you can't get anywhere near the contribution limit on your own, you have to have huge amounts of employer contribution, beyond simple matching, even. It's like (cough) it's designed to mainly benefit top-tier professional class folks and non-owning-class upper managers while chaining people to traditional employment or complex personal tax arrangements. The other…
>you can't get anywhere near the contribution limit on your own, That really seems like an overstatement. 401k contribution limits (without catch-up) are about $20K/year. That's no doubt more than most people save in a year but it's not that far out on the fringes of what mid-career professionals are/should be saving for retirement. I don't completely disagree with your broader point. 401ks (especially with significa…
The difference between necessity and sufficiency, particularly in regard to causality. This series of questions: Assuming A actually causes B: Can A alone cause/explain B? (sufficiency) Can anything else also cause/explain B other than A? (necessity) There's a lot more than that, but those are the basics and they'll get you far with critical thinking. Pretty much any logical fallacy in those never-ending "lists of lo…
Most are unrelated to causality, because they are based on logical implication not causality. Sufficiency and necessity are relevant, but logical sufficiency and necessity, not causal sufficiency and necessity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way 401k retirement accounts are set up in the US, you can't get anywhere near the contribution limit on your own, you have to have huge amounts of employer contribution, beyond simple matching, even. It's like (cough) it's designed to mainly benefit top-tier professional class folks and non-owning-class upper managers while chaining people to traditional employment or complex personal tax arrangements. The other…
>you can't get anywhere near the contribution limit on your own, That really seems like an overstatement. 401k contribution limits (without catch-up) are about $20K/year. That's no doubt more than most people save in a year but it's not that far out on the fringes of what mid-career professionals are/should be saving for retirement. I don't completely disagree with your broader point. 401ks (especially with significa…
The GP may be referring to the $57K limit which is the total employee + employer contribution. The $20K/year limit is salary contributions. I think there's also a backdoor that lets the employee contribute more, but the real limit is $57K.
> But they're actually less of a big deal for top execs etc. for whom the dollar amounts are relatively small.
Indeed, few highly compensated execs rely on 401K. They cannot even get tax benefits for IRA's. The 401K and IRAs are designed for the middle class. The main problem is that you need an employer who provides a 401K. If my employer doesn't, I can't go and get one on my own (correct me if I'm wrong). On top of that, you are constrained by the funds provided by your employer's choice of 401K provider (e.g. may only have access to high fund fees).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>you can't get anywhere near the contribution limit on your own, That really seems like an overstatement. 401k contribution limits (without catch-up) are about $20K/year. That's no doubt more than most people save in a year but it's not that far out on the fringes of what mid-career professionals are/should be saving for retirement. I don't completely disagree with your broader point. 401ks (especially with significa…
The total contribution limit is ~$56k/yr. $19k is the limit on what you , the employee (or LLC owner or partnership member) can contribute, which is exactly what I'm talking about—most of the money has to come from your employer if you want the maximum possible benefit. It's pretty rad if your "employer" is your (or your rich parents') C corp, or you're an owning member of an S corp that's rolling in money, though.