I’m about to go to the cinema so I can’t find you references, but there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence at least of glp1’s curbing all sorts of addictive behaviour. I personally started Mounjaro last week and my coffee cravings have gone way, way down for the first time in my adult life.
I believe there is, I don't recall the source but have read that these drugs work by reducing cravings. So they have shown at least hints that they can work on any addictive behavior, not just overeating.
Why is AI demand any different than other business demand? What you're advocating for is intentionally handcuffing a growing industry for no reason other than you don't like them.
because they're driving up electric prices disproportionately...
the argument is to handcuff them because of the externalities. which is one of the things laws are for. It's not about fairness it's about whether this is the world we want to live in. The market was designed a certain way; the design stops benefitting the public the way it should; so update the design, easy.
Any industry that stresses public infrastructure is in the same category. They all should be regulated and not handed, in the form of tax breaks, what should be public money to invest in additional infrastructure.
tldr; DHH is a controversial figure, and Framework are latching onto Omarchy. I think some folks think that Framework's image is being tarnished by working with DHH.
It really is so sad to see people get sucked into the alt-right pipeline and not even realize it despite it being so obvious from the outside that it's happening. For all his talk on indoctrination it's weird to suddenly have very specific opinions on a bunch of unrelated topics you have no personal involvement in, no expertise in, and tangible connection to. Even if you have feeling about some of these issues in passing no normal person with a dayjob becomes so prolific about all of them at once.
Except, of course, that despite these issues not moving the needle on basically anything in daily life they are all connected as part of a grand conspiracy corrupt society in some nonspecific way and must be eradicated. In a way I really can't blame any individual because there's very little in the way of defenses against it but it's sad to see the cocktail of intelligence, arrogance, and fame mean that no one will ever be successful at pulling him out.
Fortunately there doesn't seem to be any harm from flossing. At least from my anecdotal experience there are positive bad breath ramifications. (I've also been conditioned, by flossing regularly, to feel like my mouth is "cleaner" after flossing, to the point that it feels bad if I don't.)
Many people are not honest about how much they floss, and those who do often don't floss correctly. We have a well understood mechanism for how tooth decay and gingivitis happen, and it's clear clinically that flossing can address these more effectively than brushing alone can. Furthermore, the subjective reduction in bad breath means harmful oral bacteria are reduced, which could have benefits beyond oral health.
This is the key issue. There is zero doubt whatsoever that flossing is essential, and the fact that the empirical evidence is equivocal shows the limitations of science to prove even the most obvious things.
I do floss, but I genuinely don't see that this is obvious. You can do a lot of damage with mechanical force, to both teeth and gums! Starting a flossing regimen after not having one tends to cause pain--isn't that a signal to stop? etc.
Furthermore, correlation is not causation and it could well be the case that flossing is associated with better outcomes without causing it. For example, people who can afford to go to the dentist regularly are therefore regularly told to floss. People who care about dental health in general probably floss more, but also may be doing other things, consciously or unconsciously, to improve outcomes. Gut (and perhaps mouth) bacteria have behavioral effects; perhaps flossing is caused by having healthy mouth bacteria!
(at least one study says mouthwash is better than floss. That seems obvious to me! liquids are smaller than floss.)
Actually, recent research suggests daily mouthwash use, especially alcohol-based and antimicrobial formulas, carries underappreciated risks (e.g., Microbiome disruption kills beneficial oral bacteria that help regulate blood pressure while promoting harmful strains linked to gum disease and certain cancers [oral, esophageal, colorectal]; Long-term alcohol-based mouthwash use is associated a with 40-60% increased risk of oral/pharyngeal cancers, with risk scaling by frequency and duration; Chlorhexidine reduces nitrate-reducing bacteria, potentially raising blood pressure and increasing prediabetes/diabetes risk even in healthy users; Some formulas actually increase acidic bacteria that lower salivary pH, promoting tooth demineralization and staining).
In other words, mouthwash offers short-term hygiene benefits but should probably not be used daily unless medically indicated. The oral microbiome matters more than we thought, and indiscriminately nuking it has downstream effects.
Do you have consistent gaps between all your teeth, and/or other conditions like strong enamel, or a good diet? If so, congratulations - flossing might not do much for you. But it's ridiculous to suggest that - if you don't floss and get food stuck between your teeth for days on end - that doesn't have a negative effect. Arguments about correlation/causation be damned.
> Starting a flossing regimen after not having one tends to cause pain--isn't that a signal to stop?
Moderate exercise after not exercising for a while causes pain - is that a signal to stop?
Any chance you would be willing to summarize the research or provide information on some relevant studies? I've always been skeptical about flossing and would like to learn more.
The wikipedia article [1] suggests that there is no strong evidence for flossing being a good thing. However, that might just be because experts have not updated the article.
I hear so many counter-logical ideas proposed with "scientific evidence". Poorly designed studies and P-Hacking has ruined the publics trust in science. I highly doubt flossing is a net negative for almost anyone.
Sleeping with tinnitus can be very hard and increases the anxiety. At least it was for me. I found specific sleep earphones worked particularly well at reducing this.
Yeah, I think it's way too expensive if you're not using USD. It's +70% more than the price of the current Factorio steam price in my local currency. And with 40$ for the steam release, it has to be higher than Factorio post-conversion (current Factorio USD price is 35$).
It's a hard sell for me, considering Factorio has a ton of actively developed mods (cough Space Exploration 0.7 cough), a demo, and in early access era it's cheaper and insanely polished.
From a quick glance, I'm not sure whether it's a fun game or not, as realism tends to be not fun. Requiring an internet connection for map tiles also sounds not good for offline play.
Well, I'll wait for reviews when it's out before deciding then.
At $30, I've got a lot of expectations. At $40, I've got a lot more. Neither of those price points are the impulse buy for "it might be a nice game that I could waste a few hours on." It's competing with things like Satisfactory and Factorio for promise of enduring in my library gaming.
This feels something closer to Puffin Planes ($12), Rail Route ($25), Station Flow ($18).
The difference between $25 and $30 isn't too much, but there's another significant hurdle to get up to a perceived $40 value.
It does look interesting, but for a purchase at that price point, I'm going to need to feel that its worth more than a weekend or two of gaming and something that will be a game that I want to pick up again after a month or two away from it.
This gets into the economics of whether it's more worthwhile to sell to a large, casual audience for say $10 or a small enthusiast audience at $30-40. At the enthusiast price I expect a polished game at launch and loads of reasonably priced expansions in the not too distant future.
> It's completely obnoxious and I hope Microsoft cracks down on it
I hope they don't. Competitive gaming has been begging to stop cheaters for a long time. Ring 0 anti cheat has shown to be very effective against the vast majority of cheaters. Compare CSGO with something like Valorant. It's clear it's effective. Is it invasive? Sure. Is it mandatory? No (sorry you just cant play the game).
Bring back private lobbies/private servers then. Make the anti-cheat optional. Those that want to play in public lobbies have to rootkit their PC or play on console, those that don't still get to play the game without it but not in public lobbies.
There is even more massive fraud taking place within Google's ecosystem of approved apps on Android. Google does nothing at all about it for the simple reason that Google cashes in on a percentage of the loot. I myself have been scammed by two apps that claimed to offer specific services, but they didn't offer them.
Most privately installed apps are for open source degoogled software that doesn't want to bother with Google.
> There's nothing inherently wrong with inequality
If you're talking about a spherical economy in a vacuum, no, there isn't.
When we actually turn our attention to the real world, we find that, in fact, there is. Because when the people at the top have sufficiently disproportionate power (and wealth is a kind of power), they use that power to increase the inequality by any means necessary. That includes, fairly prominently, redirecting resources that would otherwise have gone to ensuring the floor stays high to raising their own ceilings.
So it's not a binary—either there is perfect equality or everything goes to shit—but the levels of inequality we have today are demonstrably bad for society.
