Would love to see a study looking at people who spend significant time in video games that require spatial navigation.

That could even be a form of therapy after diagnosis (which seems to become easier with biomarkers).

Vsauce did a video about how League of Legends can affect spatial navigation and the brain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RHsAUyFCAM It seemed a bit odd to me since LoL isn't especially navigation-heavy, but Michael from Vsauce later confirmed he was actually playing LoL (they just weren't allowed to name it or show it directly - https://www.reddit.com/r/vsauce/comments/7igkve/what_game_do...).

Hmm, never played LoL myself but is keeping track of were the opposing hero can be given were you last saw them a big part of the strategy?

That description is accurate, but that's more of an attention management problem then of a navigation problem. You have to infer information about opponent positioning based on partial information, while also moving your character with repeated clicks, each click requiring precision (and more of your attention). It's more like poker in real-time with timers than to remembering a whole city infrastructure or planning a full route.

If LoL trained you for ambulance work, the world would look something like: there are 5 hospitals, 3 patients, 15 roads; a hospital inspector goes from hospital to hospital, panicked hospital managers open that hospital for 5 hours after inspector is about to arrive; you have another ambulance friend that tells you from time to time info about last inspector location or how panicked the managers looked; infer open hospitals and inspector location such that your patient survives, while you also have to maintain a high Candy Crush score on your phone non-stop.

Only for high level strategy I would say. Generally you have to process lots of visual information and decide/act fast according to it.

There is a small mini-map where all heroes currently visible on the map are shown. A high level player would for example reason: "I saw the enemy carry farming there 30 seconds ago, so right now he is likely in that area".

Look at https://seaheroquest.com/papers this is a game I designed and developed that links spatial performance to population scale navigation changes across 4.3m people.

Is this a mem or where does this global cross platform push to gather biometrics come from?

He does have a German wikipedia page

It's not useless. It might be expected, but now it's more certain. This allows planning with it.

Scientifically it's valid, and good scientists and doctors would immediately pick up on the nuance.

The issue is shameless "science" reporting like this which packages up the results for non experts, without explaining the nuance because they know the sensational headlines will get more attention, and they know non-expert readers will get scared and share the article on places like HN or Facebook.

It's such an obvious play: find one doctor who'll make a loaded statement with the word "whiplash", write on this one study as if it's gospel truth, get everyone reading it as scared as possible. Throw in links to other emotional articles like "Can you die of a broken heart?" throughout the text to trigger secondary emotional reactions that will get confused with the main ones. Boom, social media sharing heaven, who cares if the science was valid or not?

And to be clear, the science underneath might be valid, probably even is, but it would need the expertise of someone who understands statistics and medicine to decide whether you should take action based on this or not.

The doctor using the word “whiplash” is one of the authors of the study.

You can look at a tree and feels things by yourself. Also there's the shared readership.

Reminds me of a colleague who said they don't need to learn to type faster, since they use the time to think what they want to write.

A good rule would then be to capture such reasoning, at least when made during the session with the agent, in the commit messages the agent creates.

That’s exactly the direction I went with. Working on a spec for exactly this - planning to post it here soon:

https://github.com/berserkdisruptors/contextual-commits

The dystopia nobody saw coming: eternal life in a mosquito infested matrix.

Uighur concentration camps? Falun Gong organ harvesting?

How can you say the Uyghur genocide isn't "equivalent" to the things you listed? What math are you using to compare them? How do you compare regime change in South America to Uyghur genocide, for example? Is there a spreadsheet somewhere that lists the value you're placing on lives, war and geopolitical actions, in order to make a fair comparison?

The UN has released a report on human rights abuses in China, but has not called these a genocide. The more credible accusations of genocide came from a handful of political bodies in Western countries, but crucially the acting governments have not defined it as such.

There’s absolutely no consensus that the legal definition is met, in contrast with another ongoing situation which enjoys wide recognition.

It feels that this is more a geopolitical cudgel, pulled out when the discourse against the US becomes negative. But given the events in the last years, this seems like a lost cause even in the West, never-mind the rest of the world.

Surely that's only because China has a permanent position on the security council and wouldn't allow such a report to be made. Israel does not sit on that council, and while the current admin is quite cozy with them, the Biden admin became fed up with Netanyahu and his treatment of Palestinians, culminating in the US ambassador to the UN abstaining from votes against Israel rather than voting to protect it.

But that's beside my point. It's too late to edit my post, so pretend I used the word "culling" instead of "genocide." How does one weigh a Uyghur culling against a South American regime change? What's the exchange rate?

Nice! You got two!