Problem with financial sector began when US Treasury dropped gold standard as basis for dollar. Since then FED has unrestricted ability to create "money" from the void. This leads to market bubbles, where the real money, earned on real-life activities such as manufacturing being lost in financial-market-style gambling. It is remarkable that so called "crysises" started to happen more often as financial sector grew.
No, it is an evolutionary strategy embedded in our genes: to deliver a baby woman is needed for at least 9 months, and man is needed for about 10-15 minutes (assuming it is just "quick one" :) ). Also, one man can impregnate many women in relatively short time. That's why for last few millions years men were considered disposable, went hunting or to war, and women stayed in a safe place.
This article reminded me a quote by the commissioner of the United States Patent Office in 19th century. He said: "Everything that can be invented has been invented." and then quit his job :)
Is this study controled for age? Testosterone decreases with age, and the very definition of Long Term Relationship assumes that men in LTR are older than singles :)
It has nothing to do with intelligence, it is just all about being realist. Existence of different races comes from the fact that there are genetic differences between people. It would be stupid to assume that those genetic differences have no other effect than skin color.
I am always amazed how scientists lack logical thinking ability. They tend to jump into most riddiculous conclusions drawn from the facts that can be easily explained by simpler, more reasonable hipotesis.
What you point out is a perfect example of this attitude.
In fact there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that women DO marry for income (famous internet "Spot the milionaire" memes being one of them :) )
Mentioned in the article is the fact, that women do spend a lot more time than man working on their attractivenes (dieting, make-up, hair-dressing), while it is also known the men are much more carieer-oriented, competing for higher positions and higher income. Those two facts alone are enough evidence to prove that "Trading beauty for wealth" is not a myth, it is a fact of life.
BTW. How many top models married to handsome but poor, unemployed guys you know? Or how many male milionaries having not-so-pretty, old and overweight wife ?
I never got the hype about saving endangered species. I am for ecology when it comes to contamination - clean water, air, soil are really invaluable. But when it comes to saving species then keep in mind that 95% of all species that ever lived are already extinct (dinosaurs being most famous example). So I personally don't care whether earth has 95,000 or 94,994 spiecies of fish. But I care about water that would be wasted to save them.
This gets posted to HN every couple of months... Can we, maybe create somethink like HN "Hall of Fame", where we will store all-time best submissions? just to avoid resubmitting it every time new generation of programmers digs them out.
"If it's not allowed — we shouldn't assume it's allowed" - that sounds like definition of totalitarianism to me. Every freedom-loving country in existence follows exactly opposite rule "if it is not forbidden, then it is allowed". Otherwise we all end up being treated like slaves.
Economic 101 course for you.
In your original comment you said:
> By definition, profit is extracting more than the 'worth' of something.
You are terribly wrong, because, by definition, there is no such thing as objective worth of something you buy. There is only subjective worth and it is different for different people. And that is the sole things that enables us to trade goods at all.
Example: what is worth more: 5$ or a pack of ciggaretes? non-smoking shop owner probably will choose 5$, average smoker will choose pack of ciggaretes. And they DO choose that every day - every time you buy something you prove that the thing you bought is more valuable to you than the money you spent. Otherwise you wouldn't buy it.
So, if two people make transaction volunteerly the price paid is always fair, and both people end up thinking that they traded something less valuable for something more valuable. That's called "mutually beneficial" :)
There is one thing I always wanted to know about things like LHC: they are supposed to detect the smallest particles known to a mankind, using detectors that are billions times larger in size. So, let's say that we collide some particles, and a Higg's bozon emerges from the collision. But still, it is just one tiny particle hitting detector at least 14 nm in size (assuming that latest Intel transistor size is the boundry of how small things we can make). So how is it possible that the bozon hitting detector produces any electrical signal at all? And how we tell apart that signal from white electrical noise? For me whole experimental physics is just a scam: bunch of scientist analyzing gigabytes of data which are just random white noise, but if you stare at them long enough then your paranoid mind just start seeing nonexistent paterns and creating wild theories to explain that "patterns"
Casuality is exactly reverse here: people are not healthy because they drink, but they drink because they are healthy (and, of course, because they like alcohol). Once your health starts to break (with age and with every gram of alcohol drunk) doctor forbids you to drink, so you become abstinent.
http://www.agrosnova.pl/files/biuro_prasowe/komunikaty_praso...