camera that watches you drink the verification can
camera that watches you drink the verification can
You’d have to try it to find out. I’d like to think they were smart enough to brick this thing if it doesn’t call home every so often or maybe it has a unique controller? Maybe you’re really badass and can make it happen. They could always try to come at you for…$550 I guess? I think that’s what their fine print says.
edit: correction
for the real processed stuff that comes individually wrapped, any place you need an instant melt cheese-turns-into-a-sauce sort of thing
“He captured this feeling of people who are tired of being lied to, tired of being lied to by politicians and officeholders of both political parties,” Lotter said. “And they were sick and tired of another poll-tested Washington creation politician. … I think he taps into that, and he has been able to keep that going.”
I’ve got to be more careful. I’ve just woken up after facepalming so hard I lost consciousness. So they want to be lied to by a mass media created and tested politician instead?
I’m a little worried about the state level elector shenanigans that have played out since 2020. Is it possible we’ll see a state ignore it’s own voters?
Why? What should people know about Texas power grid upgrades?
Best I can see right now is ERCOT and others saying lots of upgrades have been made, but not specifics. I can see ERCOT and the legislature going back and forth on a “market overhaul” that no one can quite agree on yet and which favors more on-demand sources (natural gas and such). Can you point to where people should read about upgrades?
I think there is a bad title here, but that’s not the title at the link. I don’t know where this title came from. OP? The link is a pretty straight forward reporting of this recently released EIA report and doesn’t seem to contain much of the author’s opinion (apart from being on a renewable biased website).
The author of the article doesn’t say anything about “surplus generation”, that’s a quote from the report.
You don’t think the US Energy Information Administration knows what it’s talking about? Bold stance.
Thanks! I’m really impressed all the embedded links (at least the nyt ones) to other related articles are also archive links.
Directors already made their deal. Could they still go on strike?
Do it!
That’s cool Fran Drescher is the SAG president. Didn’t know that. I did know she doesn’t really have “The Nanny” voice but I did read her quotes in that voice. Just sticks with you.
I wonder what a LLM trained on the increasingly…shifted content Twitter has recently would look like.
never cracked a screen but 90% of the time I take it out as I sit down
Cool comparison. I didn’t know it could be had so many ways.
I feel like a huge part of the arcade experience was the free spinning steering wheel controller. You just spun it hard and stopped it after your truck made it around the corner. No unwinding of the wheel or anything. As a kid that couldn’t drive, that was the right amount of realism (untealism?).
Still a millennial if you were born in early 80s. I’d say the 90s were a pretty golden time for a lot of the US.
This article doesn’t actually mention the values of the temperatures (probably to cover relieve themselves of the responsibility of those details) so I’ll go to their first link, the theHill.com one. They don’t directly give a value in their text either…
Reading that, the exact same thing is happening as that twitter screenshot thread with the map of the southern US color coded for temperatures.
Basically, wet bulb globe temperature is being conflated with wet bulb temperature. Globe is in the sun, the other is not. The thehill.com source uses a chart and description for globe, doesn’t mention the word globe anywhere, then says you can’t survive more than 35C with a link to a study. That 35C/88F is the limit for a wet bulb temperature, not wet bulb globe temperature. Obviously measuring something in the sun is going to give a higher number than in the shade. You can’t say “it’s this temperature” referencing wet bulb globe and also say “you couldn’t survive that temperature” using the “survivability” limit of wet bulb without any sort of qualification/clarification as to the distinction. Obviously it’s hotter in the sun. If that same temperature is reached in the shade it’s that much hotter in the sun.
Sure, we’re all facing extreme climate apocalypse, but this is annoying that the terms are being used as the same thing, and I’d argue detrimental to the cause. When these things are incorrect, it’s just more ammunition for deniers and doubters to point at to justify their continued intentional ignorance.
The inhibitors of the Revelation Space universe of books by Alastair Reynolds are a sort of unknowable, unescapale, and undefeatable force.
A secret force/organization that is seemingly undetectable and unbeatable bad guys that are always one step ahead of the good guys is one of the antagonists of the Pandora Star and Judas Unchained 2 book series from Peter F Hamilton.
I was looking for this take. It seems like there’s huge amounts of data to constantly be serving up for video compared to more transactions but of smaller chunks of info for majority of threadiverse stuff
I don’t know enough to disqualify the studies they cite, but I guess at least these folks seem to be the opposite of industry shills? There is an Alzheimer’s section. US Right to Know: Aspartame
The Alzheimer’s Association (safely covering their asses) defers to the FDA’s approval but does note concerns have been raised. it’s myth 5 here
I’d definitely buy the appetite increase. I think there is good research into how the brain perceives through taste and other mechanisms to understand foods as calorically dense (sweetness, umami, fatty) causes reinforcing/reward of eating behavior, making you eat more. [I really had to hold back saying “neural pathways”. Always wanted to say that. I’m not really qualified to.]
This has the look that triggers my dietary literature skepticism, but it’s not very diet-y, mostly just on the science and previous studies as far as I’ve read so far The Hungry Brain.
I hope you’re doing well.
I was looking for more information on this topic and browsing this Study suggests association between consuming artificial sweeteners and increased cancer risk and chuckled seeing this in the section describing limitations:
reverse causality cannot be ruled out
Which I guess means the participants that had cancer later means the (undetected at time of study?) cancer made them consume more Aspartame? Sort of fit your anecdote.
From a Texan: Welcome to the heat dome!