stinkbeetle

40 ms·

511.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
I don't understand what you're getting at. You're saying some "dynamic" of people you have noticed do not really support free speech in some cases? Lots of people don't support free speech. My original post bem
512.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> >the old guard of free speech and privacy activists on the internet has long gone, drowned by a sea of unprincipled populist reactionaries > which is an unnecessary ideological divide if your concern is free speech and privacy; W
513.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> I've found it somewhat interesting that we'll be shocked at a fire truck, which gets a life time of 15-25 years and works in the service exclusively of saving lives, costs around $2 million, but not be shocked that we effecti
514.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
When it's companies preying on impulse buying, brands, trends, temporary demand spikes like a popular water park on a popular weekend then it's understandable to see people paying more than they "should" have (according
515.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Sadly the old guard of free speech and privacy activists on the internet has long gone, drowned by a sea of unprincipled populist reactionaries - if their team decided that the content is "problematic", then they are entirely ju
516.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Yep, government bureaucracy has always been horribly corrupt, incompetent, and self-serving, unfortunately.
517.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Except when deployed in wilderness areas that require access roads, staging areas, and electricity networks to be cleared. Which is often the case for wind -- hills and mountainous areas that are inherently less suitable for building and fa
518.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Without flooding enormous ecosystems and disrupting river flows, and on average half the CO2 emissions per unit of generation than hydro has, and a staggeringly lower land use per energy footprint (hydro is 100x larger, wind is 10x larger).
519.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Still, getting rid of them would not move major calorie consumption from meat to vegetable. The context here is price of food for consumer, not farmer's margins. Removing farm subsidies would cause one component of consumer food costs
520.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Amish would do a lot more burning of wood, kerosene, and other things indoors than the average population, wouldn't they?
521.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> That’s not really how the world works. Most governments already massively subsidises their agricultural sectors to create some desired eating habits in their population. The market just adjusts prices around those subsidies. By global
522.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
The diatribe appears to be sarcasm but I can't really understand what he actually advocates for. You can't "living document" source code by having a bunch of people all edit it at the same time like a google doc. And the
523.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Modern capitalist liberal democracies have theoretically strong frameworks and powers for regulating and dismantling cartels though. The real story is that politicians and bureaucrats in government become corrupted by them and fail to act
524.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
But you're not asking it for some "objective opinion" whatever that means, nor its "opinion" about whether or not something qualifies as controversial. It can answer the question the same as it answers any other que
525.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Worse, it was "we set the standards, and you can't use them".
526.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> The author has the opportunity to make choices about their situation, homeless people lack that choice, As adjudicated by whom? > they can't just go get a job, or they can't get the money together for a deposit. They can&#
527.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
I don't follow what you're getting at. OP did not have the budget to afford a house so he had to go homeless. He could have made other choices to afford a house sure, but many other homeless people could also theoretically make ch
528.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Duly noted.
529.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Thanks. Presumably we're talking about "Dose rates at the surface of the pacemaker are approximately 5 to 15 mrem per hour from the emitted gamma rays and neutrons" though.
530.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
I definitely read that part of the article, how else do you think I came up with that 90 rem / year number?? That does does not "cover" my question though. Perhaps you didn't actually read or comprehend my question? I wa
531.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> Really? Really. It's in the article linked. > If that happened before the publicised discovery, it is a very impressive example of attention to detail. The article seems to imply it was, but I don't know timelines because
532.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
Obviously. That doesn't address my question though, the dose of concern is surely the nearby tissue rather than one calculated over the whole body. If the pacemaker is resting against my lungs, I'm not going to be concerned about
533.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
This doesn't address my question. OP was talking about the whole-body dose, I'm asking about the surface and nearby dose.
534.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
> For context, the 0.1 rem yearly dose to the patient is about 1/6th of the average background dose we all get every year. Wouldn't you be more concerned about dose rates in tissues near the device though, rather than whole bod
535.
by stinkbeetle 1y ago
It was documented in Apple's user guide.