I am sorry, but this list does the exact same thing that a thousand Vogue or similar magazines do for whatever topic is trending. Substitute "successful" with "sexy" or "slim" or whatever and you get the same packaging.

It does feel like shoehorning people into fitting some particular "pattern" that the author believes to be the "secret" to obtain said goal.

I always find it surprising that such short (relatively) articles, choke full of relatively difficult to apply advice gain a mass following and plenty of readers.

It does remind me of the rather stupid advice that depressed people get every day: "pull yourself up!" Amazing how we do seem to forget the complexity that riddles our minds.

And if you're not American?

Then liccbb's suggestion doesn't apply to you. Look through the other comments and see what you can find. Or you can consider looking at the organization that liccbb is talking about, and see if there exists something similar in your own country, or start your own movement.

Also dot means attribute means less speed.

If you have to worry about that, you've taken many wrong turns in the past.

That's a huge micro-optimization. For a trivial example of a class having the attributes "a", "b" and "c", and a dict of the same,

    In [4]: %timeit d['b']  # dict
    10000000 loops, best of 3: 42.7 ns per loop

    In [6]: %timeit f.b  # class using __slots__
    The slowest run took 30.10 times longer than the fastest. This could mean that an intermediate result is being cached.
    10000000 loops, best of 3: 44 ns per loop

    In [9]: %timeit b.b  # class using __dict__
    10000000 loops, best of 3: 48.1 ns per loop

You're talking <6ns per access; except in the very exceptional case where you know you need this, in Python of all languages, it's an over optimization. The maintainability of having the stupid-simple class vastly outweighs the speed.

I do not think this is a rational response. I get that the "knee-jerk" reaction might be one of total disgust (I know because I also had it reading this), but there should be a bit of rational thought put into what would be the consequences of this. Because AI growing humans and the Matrix becoming reality is a little bit on the "surreal paranoid" side of life, given the current state of scientific knowledge. On that same train of thought, but with a more realistic outlook, we could just think of the many difficult pregnancy cases that women might face that this development might help solve. And by difficult cases I mean situations where women who want a child face complications during pregnancy. And generally (even though I'm a natural pessimist), I think it's best to have a positive outlook towards the products of our own curiosity. They might bring trouble, but there are very few other natural catalysts to progress other than curiosity. War comes to mind as an alternative, but I believe that is less than desired.

In my opinion it's much better than the live-action movie.

So, your counter-argument is to say that they are also as human as the rest of us?

For some companies, open-source projects or contributions to open-source projects are a pretty strong signal that you: a) are commited enough to work on a long term project; b) have had some experience in working on a team; c) have worked on a project that has real-life use.

Colour me biased (I'm romanian) but I think that Cluj is the perfect town to be based in if you have a well paying remote job.

Great internet (like everywhere in Romania btw), nice town, cheap living, nice places to hike to in the surrounding countryside, university town (aka lots of girls).

Except if you stop and look around, Cluj has the highest rents and building prices out of Romania.

If you're working for a western salary, then sure, it's cheap. Not for a regular Romanian, though - especially if you're not working in IT.

I suppose obesity could be considered a handicap.

Having problems walking is having problems walking. Judging the disabled because you think they deserve it doesn't make them healthy again. I'm not sure what it accomplishes, to be honest.

Scores you some point of self-esteem, if you're the kind of a person who bases their worth on comparing themselves with "those others".

I think the idea is that you can have problems with walking that could be fixed by walking (I am currently in a situation like that after a knee surgery). I cases like that, this would not be a (objectively) helpful device.

But I do not consider myself qualified on this topic, as I have no idea how far the obesity problem has gone in the US.

If you have -limited- mobility then a device that can get you through everyday life instead of limiting your everyday life to your current mobility level is beneficial. Your hypothetical future mobility is not the point. If you can only walk 1 mile then this lets you get to something 2 miles away until you get to the point where you can walk those two miles. Working with an occupational therapist is obviously a complete therapy.

If you have problems with X that could be easily solved by Y, you don't buy device Z instead that makes problem X worse. People aren't that dumb. If they buy Z, they have some other reasons.

EDIT nevermind, I'm being stupid here. Too much coffee probably. Commenters below are right.

If Y is a strenuous activity (walking when very overweight), if the problems caused by X (obesity) are mostly long-term, and if Z is a device that offers immediate relief for X's short-term problems, then yes people very often buy Z.

People choose immediate gratification over long-term solutions all the time.

I myself just avoided walking for a few months, and I've seen quite a few people use aids that they should not use out of laziness. So I disagree with your statement.

English centric view to say the least. If the "speakularity" comes, given the current state of transcription and voice recognition software it is very probable that only english speaking people would be "affected".

French speaker agreeing here, the vocal recognition is currently at least 10 years behind English and I can't get any device to recognize anything meaningful of what I say, I guess for the "speakularity", we can wait !