Also due to reduced water vapor and ice cover lol. It’s a conclusion that can be drawn without much reliance on the article, which focuses a lot on specific climate model improvements and not the obvious concern: given our desire for the earth to reflect more of the sun’s rays and cool off, reflecting fewer and warming up is not good
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 148
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 148
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
AI gets subs wrong, and thinking that doesn’t matter is both ableist and just a terrible lazy product, but that’s not the pressing matter.
It’s Israel. Because giving money to another party is not a value neutral action. Using a site that pays money to Israel—and you either know what that means or are purposefully avoiding the subject—means you are supporting Israel. Your consumption does not occur in a vacuum.
She is. A problem that has become quite apparent in the U.S. is that there are no effective measures to stop an unpopular government. The Republicans have at this time gerrymandered their voting districts and otherwise reformed democratic institutions in their favor, and are passing legislation that opposes the will of the people. They have no fear of recall, nor impeachment—there is nothing.
The vitriol people feel towards Democrats like Kamala Harris stems, among other reasons like sexism, from two common sources: a belief that Democrats spent too much time compromising with a party that openly opposed the people and the limits of government control, and a level of incredulity at the very institutional language that they are using while it is obvious that Republicans are now simply tearing down institutions they don’t like.
Just this morning I got an email from Alexandria Occasio-Cortez’s team—one of the U.S.’s most radical government representatives —that read, “And when Republicans use a legislative mechanism to gut the American healthcare system, we have to use a legislative mechanism in order to restore it and fight for it.”
How does that work? We have no legislative mechanisms available to us. The ruling party has taken away legislative mechanisms. It’s like asking a children’s basketball team to keep playing and try harder when their opponents have tossed the ball right out of the gym. The entire idea is premised on someone returning the ball—or to return from the metaphor, that Republicans are going to wreak havoc for two years and then get voted out of office because they allow enough of their enemies to vote. And that it’s “democratic” to sit and wait our turn while peoples’ deaths in the States and around the world are directly attributable to this administration’s undemocratic actions and our collective failure to stop them as of this moment.
We’re really about to have AI turn a few bullet points into a report for another AI to summarize with a few bullet points instead of getting rid of reports that only exist to keep uninvolved leeches “in the loop”
In this ‘hypothetical scenario’ all the reports are also taking place within a college advancement office, an institution that employs hundreds of people to solicit gifts from wealthy people that can be invested in wealthy people’s companies so that future college costs can be offset by the dividends paid out by the constant growth of these propped up businesses. Enshrining the current world order instead of imagining a world where heads of businesses don’t make so much extra money that it’s worth wining and dining them in an effort to get them to share a bit of the money they took back with you (for you to give back to them) (and their friends want some too of course) (hypothetically)
It will impact weather patterns and severity. I’ve certainly not done the work on how much, nor do I really have a grasp on the scales involved, so that’s mostly a meaningless statement, but I can say with confidence the impact will be real. Just like dams affecting rivers, icecap mass affecting heat reflection, and solar panels increasing local temperatures.
Given that one of the impacts of global climate change has been increased weather severity and chaos, I am not afraid of positing that reducing the severity and chaos of the jet streams could be a good thing.
Similarly, there are some interesting projects going on surrounding the use of aerogel and other materials that could help focus sunlight at the top of the oceans, where evaporation can actually occur, that are focused on creating clean drinking water—and while I think this is a good end unto itself, a nice side benefit would be less solar energy reaching the ocean and raising the body temperature.
For once, it’s cool to hear about proposed industrial projects and their side effects and they’re maybe positive, instead of “well that sounds like it’s going to leech heavy metals into the surrounding community”
Of course, aerogel is horrible to work with and clogs if it doesn’t break, and nobody else has solved the problem of scaling up and dealing with the steam getting in the way. On the lightweight flying jet stream turbine front, well, I’ve been following development for 8 years and nobody has even solved the ‘limited supply of helium leaking away into space’ problem for starters. And it’s hard making an efficient generator so lightweight that it can fly. So we don’t have to worry about them potentially improving global weather severity just yet. Or potentially devastating our remaining populations of migratory birds!
Or realizing that sometimes you’re looking for something specific. I remembered an old website that described the seven major metropolises of Antarctica the other day and spent a month trying on and off to coax the result out of Google, which kept serving me results that only matched a few words from my search while Gemini tried alternately to educate me about how there were no real cities in Antarctica and to make up its own stories about imaginary cities there.
As frustrating as it is I think we benefit more from welcoming latecomers than shaming them and thinning the number of people of people willing to admit they were wrong in the future
Not only does closing the lid do just that, it works the exact way you’d think it would. The lid is not effective at preventing viral spread. Not the only cause for concern when it comes to things exiting the toilet bowl.
- Jump
Matthew Dowd No Longer With MSNBC After Furor Over Comments Following Charlie Kirk Shooting — Update
Some people fail to see policy as violence. They view it as civilized, even when its outcomes are suffering and death. They then view resistance to that policy as violence. You’re supposed to do things the “right way” and change the policy by voting like a civilized person. Conveniently, that doesn’t work, so you’re always forced into being the bad guy if you have a soul and want to stop hurting people.
I’d frame going to CBT as “making your trips outdoors more enjoyable” rather than “compromising your stance on worms.” It could radically improve your average day.
Hard truth: he polled better than Clinton among the demographics that voted Trump into office. Shame the DNC railroaded him by publicly announcing that delegates wouldn’t vote for him. Shame they strategically pulled other candidates from the race to shore up votes for Biden in 2020. You can also thank him for meeting with Biden’s team during Covid and crafting a joint platform to help them win votes, since Biden barely has a progressive bone in his body. Shame about the surrounding elections, who knows what went wrong there?
Hard truth: Donna Brazile and Elizabeth Warren gave public statements that the 2016 primary was rigged before they walked it back. That Donna Brazile, the one who gave two questions to the Clinton campaign before the debate. You’re free to speculate as to why the former chair of the DNC and another railroaded progressive voice in the party would have knowingly made such a statement on the record.
Hard truth: Bernie’s policies are popular. The ones the Democrats have adopted are the only things keeping them above water, and unless you’re looking forward to a Democratic Party that chases the white male vote by being hard on crime and immigration again—and those strategy meetings have occurred and you’re free to read about them—you’re going to have to change your tune.
Also a neat site. It seems like the ratio of usable protein would be a good addition to, but a lacking substitute for, the raw quantities. Especially given how incomplete the PCDAAS and DIAAS datasets are.
That’s a neat site, and I was hoping your answer was in there, but they don’t have data on cooked mushrooms. We’ll have to do a bit of math.
So you’re taking the nutritional data provided and then shunting the fiber and water out of the way. Why? You can’t just eat the nutritional parts of food; you have to eat the whole thing, and that limits the amount of food, and thus nutrition, you can ingest in a day.
Were you thinking about food prep? Some water weight is lost there, certainly, but it’s not everything.
Let’s add a raw steak into the mix, and then we can instead look at how much water weight is actually lost when you prep these things to eat, by estimating it from data elsewhere.
The beans are ready to eat. They’re drained and rinsed. You don’t remove that water weight. So that’s 7 grams of protein per 100 gram serving.
The steak will lose about 25% of its weight when cooked, per multiple sources I found during a search. That means we need about 133 grams of raw beef to achieve 100 grams of cooked beef. So we can multiply its 21 grams of protein by 1.33, and we get about 29 grams of protein in a 100 gram serving. Their grilled steak averages around the same amount, so we’re on track so far.
Why is that discrepancy so great? I thought beans were supposed to be a great replacement for meat?
That comparison was done between beef and dry beans (note the 24 grams of protein, about the same as the beef). 100 grams of dry beans becomes about 370 grams of prepared beans. So in a 100 gram serving of beans you can actually eat, you get just over a quarter of that 24 grams protein: our ~7 grams from earlier. You also lose some water soluble protein when you rinse and drain them. They’re not the magic protein replacement people think they are.
Mushrooms are even worse. Per America’s Test Kitchen (and we’re gonna have to take these numbers at face value because I can’t find anything else), shiitake mushrooms lose about 14% of their weight in water when cooked, and cremini (think portobello, they’re just different stages of development) mushrooms lose about 60%. Thankfully the USDA’s site also has nutritional data listed for these two types of mushrooms: “minimally processed” shiitake and cremini mushrooms contain 2.4 and 3.1 grams of protein, respectively, per 100 gram serving. But those aren’t meal ready. To do that, we’ll cook the mushrooms, and they’ll shrink to 86 gram and 40 gram servings. So let’s start with enough raw mushrooms—119 grams of shiitake (or 119% of the original serving) and 250 grams (250%) of cremini. Multiply our proteins by 1.19 and 2.5 and we get a plausible range of between 3 and 8 grams of protein per 100g serving. So some are comparable to beans in their protein content! And some contain half, or less, of an already low amount when compared to the protein found in meat.
This quick comparison on Wolfram Alpha shows a similar story, with a less optimistic look at mushrooms’ possible protein content. Screenshot:
Now, the fact that you’re taking in so much more water when you eat 100 grams of beans or mushrooms than you are when you eat meat means you can eat more of them, and drink less fluids, but only to a point. And you’re certainly not getting 8 times more mushrooms than beef from a restaurant when they do a protein substitution. Getting enough protein in a vegetarian or vegan diet can be hard work. And restaurants are not making it easier by misleading people who may not know any better—I’m certain it’s careless, not malicious, but it is happening either way.
They’re (mushrooms) also constantly listed on American menus as a “protein” option despite a dire lack of the stuff
Don’t teach lol
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Obviously not, the poor spec choices led to the price. Perhaps the company claiming to focus on ethics could focus on ethics instead of bezel-less design and 120 Hz screens, thus bringing it in at a lower price point. Feel free to critique me now
I’ve only ever seen the legal “right to be forgotten” concept applied to search engines and news publications. I think the closest to this was in Delhi high court where they ruled to have some social media “news” posts deleted. But that’s far different from having platforms erase things you’ve said and may regret. And then add yet another degree of separation for using a semi-private form of communication in email.
I am not speaking authoritatively so anyone who knows more than me jump right in.
Realizing the power imbalance inherent in contract law was a major radicalizing force in my life. I believe Hobbesian and Lockean theories of social contracts are still so widely taught in U.S. civics classes (uncertain of their global reach in schools) because it’s important to convince kids early on that people choose to enter into these agreements with larger power structures for their own good. If that view isn’t ingrained deep within your self then you’ll realize how absurd it is to enter into a legally binding contract with a party that has all the power in the relationship. Why would you?! They write the language, they limit your rights, they reserve the right to change the agreement, they reserve the right to terminate the arrangement. Companies, countries, it’s all from the same playbook. If you break it, fines or jail. If they break it, good luck. If it’s not enumerated in the document it doesn’t matter because they fall back on their power to do what they please anyway. It’s wielded as a weapon that forces you to accept the status quo under threat of retaliation. How do you assert your right to anything in this system? Playing along by paying for someone to represent you and asserting your belief in and support of the legal structure that has disenfranchised you, of course. You still don’t even have a seat at the table.
Yep. Instead of focusing on humans communicating more effectively with computers, which are good at answering questions that have correct, knowable answers, we’ve invented a type of computer that can be wrong because maybe people will like the vibes more? (And we can sell vibes)