It has been a repudiation of the communication layers between experts and average people, as well, which I think might be more of Aaronson's ire than experts qua experts (it's certainly more of my ire, but I don't have his platform).
A standard of "scientists dabbling in journalism to improve communication" instead of "journalists dabbling in communicating science" would likely have gone a long way to improving the civilian response and trust in experts.
There's also the factor of the "Noble Lie" dishonesty around wearing masks. I suspect intellectual-ish contrarians (like Aaronson et al) are more angered by this than the average person, but we ended up with shortages and sellouts anyways: a significant number of non-experts didn't buy into that noble lie so the experts/organizations that pushed it (not to be confused with ALL experts) burned a lot of good will to basically no effect.
ETA: I considered replying to your comment about the Harvard epidemiologists but would rather edit it in here to avoid two replies to one person: I think that's a great example of my point. The story wasn't broken by bloggers, but bloggers were more likely to be amplifying the concerned experts than our "traditional media powerhouses."
Any chance your sister was in/near Pittsburgh or the surrounding coal-country?
The "Pittsburgh toilet"[1] is a relatively common basement feature in older homes of steel and coal industry Appalachia. Often there would be a showerhead nearby as well, and the room was intended for the worker to come home through the basement, clean off the day's grime and 'do their business' rather than dirtying the proper upstairs house. The showers are removed pretty easily but the toilets are not.
Yes. I assume they're referencing the chemical spill several years ago, and the water has tested clean consistently since.
I've never heard of other issues with the water quality in Charleston (assuming it's city water and not straight from the Kanawha), and I consider it some of the better-tasting municipal water in the Mid-Atlantic region.
It's not so much that they're Muslim, but that they're Uighar, concentrated in one region, and calling for independence much like Tibetans. The Hui are also a majority-Muslim ethnicity within China, but their faith is accepted and even growing, because they're less geographically concentrated and seem to be fine being part of China [1].
Note that's not to excuse the terrible treatment of the Uighars, but to illustrate that it's not just about their religion.
Perhaps there's a setting I've missed, but for me Apple Maps seems to "lock" onto a particular route, and if I miss a direction it'll keep trying to get me back onto that route no matter how convoluted it would be, rather than updating to the new 'best route' like Google Maps usually manages.
Other than that, which I recognize as partially user error, Apple Maps works at least as well as Google. If anything I like their routing better... so long as there's no unexpected issues.
According to CNN[1] and a scientist in Scotland- yes! It hydrates pretty much equally, though it's slightly worse for your teeth. Not nearly as bad as regular soda/pop/etc, though.
Missed the second part. The article doesn't address it, but from my knowledge flavoring shouldn't affect the hydration unless the flavor includes other components like sugar/acid/salts/caffeine/etc.
American that just recently learned about Indian pencils- they're so much better than pencils we have here! Though I'm partial to the Apsara Regal Gold instead of the traditional black and red Nataraj
The Comstock Laws [1] are probably the most famous US example, which made it illegal to use the USPS to send any obscene materials, including personal letters with sexual content.
Yudkowsky is a polarizing writer. Some people love his writing; I do not. There's the occasional nugget of wisdom but I find his style so irritating and pretentious that it's not worth suffering through.
Scott Alexander (Slatestarcodex) is related and more readable if verbose, but less focused on that groundwork material of (so-called) rationality.
I was curious, so I looked up the Northwest Coalition for Responsible Investment [1]. They have 16 member organizations, including the Tacoma Dominicans and the Sisters of St Mary of Oregon. Most of their actions seem to be 'dialogue,' which they apparently engaged in over 60 times.
That's an optimistic view of dealing with government, that they would actually be reasonable and helpful. Many in the US have a decidedly pessimistic view of dealing with regulations and bureaucracy.
Uber versus Night School is an example of this. Uber: Ignore taxi regulations, get tons of VC, get rich while being awful people. Night School: try to work with government and play by the rules, fail, get used as a cautionary tale.
I think something akin to GDPR is necessary and good, but GDPR as written probably isn't it. I look forward to seeing how it works out in practice, and how it develops/is replaced, and in the meantime feel bad for the developers and customers that suffer through the unintended consequences and misfeatures of it.
After the law gets clarified some, I think you're right that it won't be bad for small players. But I wouldn't want to be one of the test cases.
It varies by location, though. If you have a Kroger with a Murray's, the cheese selection will be much better than the average grocer. They're easy to recognize given all the Murray's branding they put up. Kroger with their standard cheese counter is pretty much what you'd expect.
A standard of "scientists dabbling in journalism to improve communication" instead of "journalists dabbling in communicating science" would likely have gone a long way to improving the civilian response and trust in experts.
There's also the factor of the "Noble Lie" dishonesty around wearing masks. I suspect intellectual-ish contrarians (like Aaronson et al) are more angered by this than the average person, but we ended up with shortages and sellouts anyways: a significant number of non-experts didn't buy into that noble lie so the experts/organizations that pushed it (not to be confused with ALL experts) burned a lot of good will to basically no effect.
ETA: I considered replying to your comment about the Harvard epidemiologists but would rather edit it in here to avoid two replies to one person: I think that's a great example of my point. The story wasn't broken by bloggers, but bloggers were more likely to be amplifying the concerned experts than our "traditional media powerhouses."