>There are indirect cultures, where communication is primarily intended to convey social status, manipulate social bonds, or perform culturally necessary rituals
Well, the first description puts it as "self delusion", while the other describes it as a rather natural reaction and puts the initiative for the change on the brands.
The first book Orwell wrote is pretty good as well. Down and out in paris and london. It's a good picture of life in the slums at the time, and much more raw than other accounts - Orwell seems to have simply recounted his experiences.
It's a bit low for Asimov to just say Orwell was slumming it like a modern hippie. He was slumming it like in the olden days, and starved for weeks.
>Using difference-in-differences designs exploiting these sharp consulting events, we find positive effects on labor productivity of 3.6% over five years, driven by modest employment reductions alongside stable or growing revenue. Average wages rise by 2.7% with no decline in labor’s share of value added, suggesting productivity gains do not come at workers’ expense through rent-shifting.
Idk, one good prof made me a fifty percent better mathematician in a single course. I would have to slam my head in the wall for a year or two to do it without him.
My professor explained that Galois originally thought about the subgroups of S_n, i.e. the set of all the permutations of n objects.
Thinking about the permutations of n objects is rather natural, especially when thinking about roots of polynomials, as when you look at roots of some polynomial you will see that some permutations of the roots are legal and some are not. And then when you investigate that you start to notice there are sets of permutation that can operate independently of the other permutation, and those are the subgroups. The concept of a "group" as an abstract term in itself was not there. Later on it was codified.