exasperation

Worked for Christopher Nolan, too. Although he did make The Prestige and Inception during his decade making Batman.

Why aren't those windows aligned with each other, this is very upsetting.

It sounds like the thesis to David Epstein's book, Range. When I read it, it was a game changer for me.

If I recall correctly, the main examples were Roger Federer (who played a lot of sports and didn't choose to specialize in tennis until much later than the typical tennis pro), jazz legend Django Reinhardt, Vincent Van Gogh, and a bunch of other less famous, but much more typical examples.

Sampling is important, and has value beyond just the things they sampled and abandoned. The act of trying many different things is itself helpful.

Van Gogh wouldn't have become the artist he became if he didn't fizzle out of multiple career paths beforehand.

David Epstein's Range really explores this idea and puts forth a pretty convincing argument that sampling and delaying specialization is helpful for becoming the type of well rounded generalist whose skills are best suited for our chaotic world.

Some daals are spicy, and could arguably be considered British?

The studio laughter (or canned laughter) still adds something. I'm not a fan of any multi cam sitcoms since Seinfeld ended, but as the article mentioned, it still does something for shows like SNL.

COVID showed that some variety type shows normally filmed before an audience still benefit from having an audience. John Oliver's show without laughter seemed weird. Some standup comics have played around with the genre without an audience, and it's really interesting.

So I'm with this article. It's a legitimate style of show that uses the laughter.

Also, it's not like you'd need the power of the government to make this happen. This is the job of an event planner, not a politician.

If someone wants this to happen, there's nothing stopping them other than their own resources and their own ability.

not someone you wanna prone bone anyway

I actually laughed out loud at the specificity here. Thank you for this, you've brightened my day.

Blues Brothers and Wayne's World were successful enough that people forget that they originated as SNL sketches. And, because they were the first, they kept on trying.

The category as a whole isn't exactly very impressive, as movies.

But the originating sketches that developed the characters were...fine.

It's Pat, the movie, was a notorious commercial bomb, and sold basically no tickets.

It was made, though, because the recurring SNL sketch was popular enough to attract the investment.

Maybe it's a confidence thing, but I think of myself in the green. Am I at the very top of the intelligence spectrum? No, but I don't need to be. The higher you go, the more there's diminishing returns to additional intelligence, and the more likely that it's something else other than intelligence holding you back. So it's worth working on those things instead of believing that being 99.9th percentile in intelligence makes a meaningful difference in one's life, compared to merely being 98th percentile. Which barely makes a difference in most situations compared to being 90th percentile.

In other words, being any smarter wouldn't unlock anything that I can't already do. The stuff I'm not capable of doing, it's not intelligence holding me back. And the stuff I'm capable of doing, well, I'm already there.

There's never gonna be a universally good unit for energy. Calories work well for heat, watt hours for stored or metered electrical energy, even electron volts for certain quantum physics. Plus the actual SI standard of joules.