shlant

23 ms·

151.
by shlant 2y ago
I think the comparison of an industry of solar panels and batteries to one of the harvesting of living animals is not a very valuable one. Just as one example: you can improve the efficiency of solar panel and/or battery technology and
152.
by shlant 2y ago
> make something like cattle farming effectively carbon-negative The situations in which this is the case (which are oversimplified by the doc) are so specific and small scale that to think they will address the environmental impact with
153.
by shlant 2y ago
> At least with sugar the risks are somewhat understood. Aspartame has been studied for 50 years. The risks are very well understood. This single study on mice does not shift that.
154.
by shlant 2y ago
> Aspartame has always been under a cloud of doubt But this is almost entirely due to alarmists who were never using good science to justify their perspectives (just like with MSG). The reality is that aspartame is one of the most studie
155.
by shlant 2y ago
a good rule of thumb is to not make significant changes based on single studies - especially on mice, ESPECIALLY in regards to controversial subjects. Robust science is not built on single studies.
156.
by shlant 2y ago
my most uncomfortable salvia experience definitely felt like my whole body was being unzipped and folded back in on itself
157.
by shlant 2y ago
I remember 2C-T7 giving me and my buddy very uncomfortable body load.
158.
by shlant 2y ago
I wish I could try a more visual-only psychedelic. They are too heady for me these days so I have avoided them all for over a decade.
159.
by shlant 2y ago
> i think one of my records is something like 12 hours after dosage to start feeling the effects. ugh that would suuuuck. Can't imagine waking up for work on a Monday after a seemingly failed trip the Sunday before lol
160.
by shlant 2y ago
that story still sticks in my brain to this day. The human brain is wild
161.
Predictive equation helps estimate misreporting energy intake in dietary surveys(nature.com)
1 points by shlant 2y ago|0 comments
162.
by shlant 2y ago
> "When I last looked up the literature" Responded to with > anecdote I'm happy you have found something that works for you but the diet tribalism on this site is getting old. At least it's good to see the initial
163.
by shlant 2y ago
> "we are better than China, we are more free" Anyone who disagrees with this is either not being honest or is not aware of what extent China restricts it's citizens.
164.
by shlant 2y ago
> Literally same arguments used by Iran. All governments/nations have some level of self-interest. That doesn't mean they are all equal in their motivations or approaches. China is literally controlling the narrative through Ti
165.
by shlant 2y ago
yea I don't think people are grasping how different places like Myspace or forums or online games are compared to modern social media.
166.
by shlant 2y ago
I don't think your story is uncommon especially for people who had trouble fitting in, however I would bet that places like facebook or instagram were not where you found your online groups. More likely to have been forums or online ga
167.
by shlant 2y ago
> everyone with an interest in the industry is invested in having prices go up indefinitely. You're missing a huge group - homeowners. NIMBY homeowners are a huge driving factor in things never changing. They vote against anything t
168.
by shlant 2y ago
> my words would mean nothing your words might not mean much but evidence would. I can only assume that you don't have any otherwise. > for you have in your possession "an unending amount of data"... show me the power o
169.
by shlant 2y ago
"almost always". Yes, advertising being the main exception. Kind of hard to change demand for homes.
170.
by shlant 2y ago
and where is your evidence for this conspiracy theory? I have an unending amount of data that shows it's a supply issue.
171.
by shlant 2y ago
the data shows over and over again that the issue is lack of supply. Zoning is the main roadblock to changing that. I don't know why you would assume people are not thinking critically about this.
172.
by shlant 2y ago
Places where many people already live will always be the most attractive. You are not going to solve this by trying to even out population density. Trying to manipulate demand with anything is almost always a losing approach. You don't
173.
by shlant 2y ago
no the new ruling limited the scope of what is illegal. Inciting violence is not protected. Neither is defamation, fraud, or false advertising.
174.
by shlant 2y ago
> legally prohibited citizens from viewing news, books and information from foreign countries. Sorry can you point out where they are doing this? because banning tiktok certainly is not doing those things.
175.
by shlant 2y ago
> Do they pay you to rabidly shill or are you just that far gone? I am slightly on the side of the OP who originally made the claim but nobody should take anyone who throw's around the "paid shill" line seriously. You real
176.
by shlant 2y ago
> Secondly no, it's not illegal to spread misinformation, no matter the motive. The First Amendment absolutely guarantees that right. Again, does NOBODY know what the first amendment covers??? If you yell FIRE in a crowded theatre (
177.
by shlant 2y ago
so in answer to my question - no you can't even imagine both could be bad. Your talking points sound very tankie so I guess nuance isn't to be expected.
178.
by shlant 2y ago
I really need to coin the phenomenon of when people attribute the reasoning for something happening as being due to the current thing they care about. I see it so often. Some sort of specific confirmation bias.
179.
by shlant 2y ago
> This is quid pro quo do you mean "tit for tat" or something similar?
180.
by shlant 2y ago
why does nobody know what freedom of speech is anymore...

More ›