Why is there a comment like this on every single HN post lately? Yes, you fall outside of the fat part of the bell curve. Congrats. What's your point? A single outlier does not disprove the post.
edited to add: fat part of the bell curve, since being outside of the bell curve entirely is not what I meant.
1. This isn't a lately thing, this type of thing has been happening for the over eight years I've been here.
2. Around 1% of people have the gene I'm referring to. Telling them they are all depressed without bothering to mention the possibility of the gene is something I'd expect better of the NYT. Just sharing the comment provides alternate theories to other HN readers that don't feel depressed.
3. I'm not sure if you read to the end of my comment, but the point is right there in black and white: "Short of a genomic test, how can one differentiate?" It isn't just a question for me, it's a question that I'm sure many people going to the article might have, and it broadens the topic more generally.
On the other hand you have people who have messed up sleep due to genetics, and this causes depression. And people who could sleep all the time and on schedule and still not feel rested.
If we change it to "fall outside of 2-sigma", will you allow us to return to the actual point, or will you continue with your passive-agressive hair-splitting?
edited to add: fat part of the bell curve, since being outside of the bell curve entirely is not what I meant.