BobaFloutist

Basically, if you're vegan because you object to industrial farming practices, and value animal welfare, eating animal products (or even meat) that you personally produced, while personally overseeing the animal welfare and farming practices doesn't necessarily violate your values.

I get that in a literal sense you wouldn't be vegan anymore, but if you're maintaining the same ethical framework that led you to veganism, it's not unreasonable to want to express that.

the main difference between myself and my peers is that I chose to live with my parents and save for a house instead of moving out

It was very clever of you to choose to be born to tolerable parents with enough spare cash to let you live with them and save up, rather than jerks or even just poor parents that needed your help as soon as you got a job.

I mean it's used by editors in headlines, but the article itself says "has described a new Colobus monkey species," and goes on to discuss the locals (relative un)familiarity with the species.

The British government have a strong, well-established (since ~1950), and arguably inflexible attitude towards "right to self-determination".

Meaning: the people who live in a place get to decide who governs them and their society.

Except for Scotland, of course.

It's interesting to me whenever developers say "actually this framework/language/library/platform that's popular and lauded for how accessible it makes development has great performance as long as you dig into the architecture and write code skillfully" because the broad consensus among users is that they will not.

As a user, comparitive "performance" is about the code people actually write, and even more on the code that I'm most likely to interact with. I don't actually care whether or not the code could be faster if it was written better, because it always could, and it never is. When people say "Electron is slow and bloated" they don't mean that exhaustively written Electron apps could never" be performant, they mean that apps that use Electron tend to be slow and bloated. The way to change that reputation is not to argue that Electron could* be fast if people held it right, but to make it easier and more natural for Electron apps to be faster than they currently are.

Do you consider the historic Arabic expansion across the middle east to be colonial, or is colonialism when boats?

Of course there are, but women tend to be inconsiderate assholes in different ways. While a population of 300 million means you could probably find plenty of counterexamples, obnoxiously loud cars and motorcycles are overwhelmingly driven by men. This isn't because men are worse than women, it's because our current culture directs antisocial men to loud vehicles, and antisocial women to other things.

I've been a fan of continuous time change for a while now.

In theory, to get a similar result to the hour change twice a year, you only need ~20 seconds of change every day, though I think you could do even better if you took location into account.

I wonder how hard it would be to program an alarm to automatically offset a default wakeup time based on location and season to always occur after dawn while minimizing daily delta (and obviously allowing for an override "wake up at h:mm local time tomorrow, my work meeting doesn't care about my snowflake sleep program." Seems relatively achievable, but maybe harder to integrate into a normal phone UX.

Right, because nobody has killed millions of people while representing themselves with a pentagram. The comparison falls flat.

One great "hack" I've discovered is that most hotels are more than happy to stow your luggage behind the counter, or even in a luggage room if you arrive before check in times.

This more or less completely eliminated my gripe with check-in times being later than I arrive to a city.

Sounds like a local maximum to me. Did you maybe mean a global maximum?

~1.5 Mg of sugar.

Could you ask him for a video of himself 3d printing it?

Part of this is defacto deregulation allowing suppliers to overcharge smaller stores with less purchasing power than big chains. (The policy not to enforce https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson%E2%80%93Patman_Act).

Part of this is overregulation, with zoning and planning departments enacting policies that make smaller retail spaces less attractive to builders and owners, leading to a low supply, and allowing egregious rent for well located small retail.

Yes, economies of scale likely mean that larger businesses can afford lower prices, but smaller businesses also get to avoid some costs (no large administrative corporate departments necessary for a one-location bodega), so the prices probably don't need to be as far apart as they are.

I think it would still be a vast improvement if online shopping was relegated back to only a narrow set of specialty goods.

And this is ignoring the possibility of ordering less time sensitive specialty goods to a relevant store, where they can arrive on an existing shipment and share an errand with whatever else you might want from that store.

Or your watch telling you the room is 98 degrees because it's only ever measuring your body temperature

I suppose that would make "Botanical Computation" the use of plants to perform calculations.

I always thought of supply and demand as more defining a limit that the price approaches as the number of transactions and the size of the market approach infinity, barring structural obstacles or persistent information asymmetry to prevent it than as something that was supposed to happen immediately on any given transaction.

I hope you're aware that this particular argument only reinforced people in their existing positions, and has no chance whatsoever of convincing people that don't already agree with you.

If I had to guess, it's like when an expensive medical test gets more accessible and they have to update their model.

If the cost to get an MRI means everyone that gets one has a combination of symptoms and risk factors raising the pre-test probability, then it makes sense to treat MRI findings aggressively. If they become cheaper and start using them as screenings, they need to update their approach.

Similarly, if license plates are scanned when cops are already pulling someone over for moving violations (or the car is accumulating a ton of parking tickets, having been dumped), it might be ok if their status isn't updated that frequently, and it still might make sense for cops to approach the car with the idea that it might be stolen (something a drivers license check against registration can quickly clear up, which shouldn't matter too much if they were getting pulled over anyway).

If the system is being used to justify pulling people over in the first place, it needs different parameters.

Sure, but you're not scaling that to median income. Exchange rate only tells you half the story.

You're comparing diesel to gasoline

It's been exceptionally successful in Singapore, for one.

Honestly I think the biggest advancements in ICE cars recently have been the development and maturation of hybrid cars. Imagine telling someone in 2006 that your minivan got 36 miles per gallon!

What box do you put librelec on?

I really feel like the first step here should be to make deanonymization illegal. Obviously it wouldn't fix everything, but there's a bit of an implicit breach of contract if people are promised their data is anonymous, but then it's sold to someone else who breaks that, but as far as I can tell there's no law against what's pretty clearly a violation of the premise under which the data was allowed to be collected.

I think the other issue is that generics have such bad margins that it's hard to convince anyone to manufacturer them in the best of cases, so if anything happens to make a generic too hard to sell they'll just give up.

Combining that with PBMs being allowed to choose a preferred manufacturer for a generic or even preferring the (more expensive for the patient) brand, and refusing to offer the same coverage for a generic and you get less access to generics than there should be.

Honestly, PBMs should have to contribute at least the same amount of money to any version of a drug. If it's genuinely more expensive for them, the patient would still have to pay more. If it's not, it's none of their business.

Maybe a football game?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Basel_hooligan_incident

I disagree, but I would also have a similar reaction if it turned out that toilet-paper supply chain issues left over from the pandemic were going to affect our ability to manage screwworms, and that particular overreaction was non-partisan.

Both! I think it would be unfortunate if a valuable deworming drug was difficult to access in an acute worm crisis because it had became unexpectedly politically salient from an crisis that did not involve worms.