htrayl

Meh, please don’t quote unusual statistics without giving any context for how to interpet them.

For this value, it is calculated by:

Using data compiled by the federal government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, the True Rate of Unemployment tracks the percentage of the U.S. labor force that does not have a full-time job (35+ hours a week) but wants one, has no job, or does not earn a living wage, conservatively pegged at $25,000 annually before taxes.

24.3% is not that out of the ordinary - you can see historical data back to like, 1995 here.

Not saying this stat is useless, but the way you’ve chosen to use it is intentionally and inaccurately inflammatory.

To add to the other comment - the materials are fundamentally cheaper, and so if manufacturing continues to scale they should be significantly cheaper.

There are quite the number of fitness bands and watches that can do this too for android. No reason you cant set up a device to the opposite partners phone.

The Jumanji sequels. You are going to take a cult classic and “revive” it by changing the premise to be a video game? Stupid. But, it was much better than it should have been.

The lack of food safety makes my eye twitch.

The lack of specificty is also a strategy used to bolster support for deregulation.

Simply say “we are eliminating regulations” , and dont ever talk about what you are deregulating, because actually many regulations are a net good for society and were implemented for a reason. Preventing companies from dumping poison is a regulation.

Amouranth?

Tech has made things more efficient - the rewards of such are simply being funneled from the average person to the wealthy.

Im going to say the Harvard estimate is probably pretty close. It is probably a bit higher than what you would need on a day to day basis for survival, but enough to help your body maintain some muscle over the long term.

Its not enough for someone wanting to be fit or muscular though.

That diet doctor recommendation feels wildly high for a “what is actually necessary” request. Like 2 g/kg is near the target for bodybuilders.

It might be a good idea for many people to hit that to maximize muscle development in preparation for aging (where muscle deterioration is chief concern), but not a good estimate for anyone who isnt worried about that.

They also say two further things which ding their credibility:

First is this comment: “Because there appears to be a limited amount of protein that can be absorbed at a meal, it may be best to evenly space out your protein throughout the day, if possible.”

This is not really a concern even for bodybuilders. You dont need to overthink spacing.

Second is the comment about vegetarians/vegans. Protein intake is not a huge concern for the average vegetarian, if you are not aiming for that unnecessarily high target - as long as they are regularly including some protein in their meals (soy, beans, nuts, eggs). Even for non-vegetarians, that higher target requires you to monitor of your protein intake to hit it regularly with overeating.

The ability for those on the left to eat each other up never disappoints.

In general, I disagree with you. I think the two things you fixated on (souless architecture and rentals) are bad approaches to density, but you will notice that for the most part, this is the form of “density” that places who are notoriously bad at density do. Its what happens when we deliberately regulate ourselves into not allowing other options.

There is a pretty crazy amount of “density” in well bit, low rise structures - though actually I dont personally hate on towers as a concept.

Also, i would like to highlight that a very small portion of people are living in newly built homes, and only a small portion are really able to make meaningful design impact. Most just buy the builder-grade suburban model home. The idea that suburban single family homes are some design panacae is just wrong.

…no, they won’t know for a few hundred years due to the actual speed of light and vast distances of space.

I’d also say, the fundamental point of it (that finite cost in life is worth the chance at infinite reward or avoiding infinite punishment) is pretty abysmal morally. Pretty easy to justify atrocities for any concept of God that way as a rational approach to life.

This is really the primary death knell for the argument. Yes, there billions and billions of “god” variations - but at least believing in one might get you a (near-zero) better chance at a decent afterlife.

…until you realize the category of “Gods who dont want your worship”.

This is part of what has made Trump so successful:

He has convinced his base (and a lot of the media) that what he says doesnt matter - lying, outrageous claims, incendiary remarks. He is schrodingers politician and his positions generally are “Whatever person X wants him to be”. There is also massive dissonance on Trump “telling it like it is” - despite that NOBODY holds him to his word.

Im not so sure. I think this is more of a question about taking arbitrary, undefined, or highly variable unstructured data and transforming it into a close approximation for structured data.

Yes, the pipeline will include additional steps beyond “LLM do the thing”, but there are plenty of tools that seek to do this with LLM assistance.

Sometimes self centered dipshits need to be called out. Your actions, and the actions of people reading this, matter.

This is a lot of words for “I don’t have any spine and won’t change my behavior if it is mildly inconvenient”

He, Andrew Ferguson

He has stated intentions to ease his predecessor’s scrutiny of business mergers and acquisitions, while continuing critical oversight of big tech platforms.

Expect continued increased in costs if goods.