Paul Burkander

It's still selection bias if they can't enter the tested sample (4th graders) until hitting a benchmark on the tested outcome (reading proficiency). But I agree with you that the article is way more nuanced than these posts suggests

I loved the movie Fat Man and Little Boy, but Oppenheimer did nothing for me. So for me it's more "do you find that telling of the making of the atomic bomb interesting," and no, no I don't

The reason you do gifted education in kindergarten is social, not academic. It’s designed to create a stratification system that keeps well resourced families in the school system, but set apart from the majority of students. It’s resource hoarding, exclusionary, and hierarchy from day one of school

The government employee fair treatment act of 2019 apparently changed that. Now only contractors have to worry www.congress.gov/116/plaws/pu...

They get back pay though, right? My understanding is furloughed federal workers get back pay automatically now

It's a good time to avoid corporations as much as possible and cut back on spending in general, for those who can

Respectfully, this reminds me of the idea that the difference between a recession and a depression is whether your neighbor or you are out of work. I think the fight begins when we start saying "I must go on strike," not "you should go on strike "

I think we'll be truly ready to fight fascism when we stop saying things like "those people should strike!" And instead start saying "i can no longer participate in this economy." It's going to take a heap load of sacrifice from no one but ourselves

Slightly diminish a book

Upton Sinclair's The Jungle Gym

So start doing it? The movement doesn't have time for this negative energy

The absolute worst thing is telling people their creative actions won't work. We're going to have to do lots of things that aren't very effective to find what is effective, so let's encourage any action over being critical and doing nothing

I'm sure you'll notice from the screen shot that OP was not using reader view. If you share a link to wapo (even when criticizing it) you're giving them free publicity. If you view their site without paying but still see ads, you're supporting them. If you're avoiding ads and subscriptions way to go

The thing I don't get about these posts is you have to subscribe to the post, financially supporting this drivel, to be able to criticize it. Like you're just telling me you like paying fascist cheerleaders. If all the critics just unsubscribe it might actually affect the post.

My reporting has come to the attention of Ghislaine Maxwell’s attorney. Here’s the response I provided to the @thedailybeast.bsky.social

l'm reading "thinking, fast and slow," which explains that we mentally replace hard questions ("how has crime changed over 3.5 decades?") with easy ones ("which is easier to recall, examples of recent crime or crime decades ago?") and so this result is not at all surprising.

I'm going to express my gratitude for the chance to chat with you by taking time to percolate on your perspective. Thanks for sharing it

If I had infinite time I'd do the same. With kids, work, and life in general, I'm instead forced to choose a few articles per day. choosing across providers is very expensive, but I think there are lots of publications writing amazing useful stories that I wish to read

As they say in advertising, "we know 50% of ads work, we just don't know which half is which." Despite their important expertise, I assume the reason for boards and editors is not guaranteeing every story gets equal readership, because they can't predict that. Thus bundling reduces risk

Yes sorry for the callous language. I imagine some stories get much more readership than others, so bundling still helps reduce risk.

It may be good for society, because newspapers can have riskier articles instead of appealing to the masses. But as a consumer I pay for tons of junk and miss good stories from many publishers. So many consumers just find ways to get the stories for free

The relevant economic theory is bundling, similar to grocers bagging oranges rather than letting consumers pick and choose. this reduces risk to firms, because the story no one reads is sold along with others. It's bad for consumers who pay for junk.

I don't think the pre-smartphone era, when digital content was primarily consumed on desktop computers, is very informative for today's media. People want digital now, and the only choice is subscriptions. An a la carte approach is way more appealing now

This clay person has a BA in fine arts? If this has been "studied endlessly," can you point to any actual studies or folks with relevant expertise who share this opinion? Because I have degrees in econ and never heard such a thing

trump is good at exploiting "anchoring biases." He throws out a number that everyone knows is ludicrous, but that number becomes a reference point that influences actual decisions because it's so ludicrous

I can't tell if "school of engineering in drag" is an insult or a fabulous compliment

More commonly known as "rodents of unusual size"

to get to the substance of your question - isn't it obvious they're not running for reelection? they act with complete disregard for polls and the well being of their constituents! the implication of this obvious fact is they intend to put their thumb on the election scales.

saying you never used that specific word while many of your posts drip with resentment at her not engaging makes it seem like you're not in a good spot for good faith discourse. This is a great time to go for a walk and consider the possibility that your ego got in the way on this one.

some obligation to have discourse with every rando is very much not the whole thing really