jbeales

Looks like it's using Prism.js: https://prismjs.com

There was a big heatwave in 2017. I can't find documentation, but "highest since 2017" might actually mean "Second-Highest Ever"

It doesn't mention it. I'm guessing it doesn't live in France. The Government of Canada says it's native to western North America[1].

[1]https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/our-natural-resources/forests-and-fo...

> How does this affect plans to sequester carbon by planting trees?

I would guess we can still get at least 20 years of sequestration out of trees planted today. Assuming we actually figure out how to tame runaway emissions and/or sequester enough, if we keep planting more & more northward I would expect we'll hit a point where things stabilize and we don't have to keep moving north.

Or we start planting teak & palms in Winnipeg.

A lot of this is Mountain Pine Beetle[1] though.

[1] https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/our-natural-resources/forests-and-fo...

Quick translation: Because of heat waves and droughts, the coniferous forests of France are drying out and dying.

A few interesting points:

- Plants with a short lifecycle migrate pretty quickly with climate change, (so, plants that like heat are moving further north). Trees, because they have a long life cycle, don't move at the same pace, so more are dying.

- There's a government project called "Project Giono" where people are taking seeds (& trees?) from the southern forests that are used to heat and planting them in the north. For example, they might take stuff from forests near Marseille, (on the Mediterranean coast), and plant them in the forests of Verdun, (northeast of Paris).

- There are 2 ways trees deal with a lack of water and heat: Option 1 is to close up their pores and stop transpiration. This way they don't run out of water, but may overheat. Option 2: Get as much water as possible and increase transpiration to cool off - but in this case if there's not enough water air bubbles will end up in the tree's veins and it'll essentially have a stroke.

Edit: formatting.

Is the main photo a Naughty by Nature reference?

Me too. It's only got 59 "visits" to my home. Even if we only count the life of this iPhone, which I've had for 18 months, that's 10% at best.

6 Hometown 7 Your actual "home" location

It's a reach, but if I was trying to inflate the "layers" count that's how I'd do it.

This seems like exactly what some commenters were asking for in the "I Scanned Austria"[1] post 9 days ago.

This seems like the digital version of checking for locked doors. Here in Montreal you can get a ticket for leaving your car door unlocked. This seems like a similar initiative, but one that protects against greater threats while being less punitive.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19113147

Here's a CNN source from yesterday that's a bit clearer: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/lufthansa-sues-passenger-...

If airline pricing made sense this wouldn't be a problem.

There's a strong argument for "$10/month is amazing for unlimited access to this entire catalog!" But I wonder how many songs or artists I actually listen to. Is it really that much more than I would if I were buying CDs?

I do enjoy the personalized playlists a lot, though.

Here's the thing(s):

1. It's not just 1 type of ad. In Little Snitch, I have permitted Spotify to connect to 281 different domain names, most of which are ad-related. That's a lot of companies being allowed to run JS in whatever webview Spotify uses to display ads. I don't listen much on my computer anymore.

2. They keep advertising deals to me - $0.99 for a month, or $9 for 3 months, that I can't subscribe to because they don't let people in Quebec sign up for them, (something related to the consumer protection laws here). These ads are audio, in-app visuals, and even E-mails. This leaves a horrible taste in my mouth, and I've let them know several times, but they never change it. That, combined with the fact that I feel like the $10/month subscription is a tad expensive, make me very reluctant to subscribe again, (I was a subscriber through my mobile phone plane for a long time). At $5/month I'd subscribe instantly. $7-8 I'd probably still do it. $9-10 I can buy 10-12 CDs per year that I own in perpetuity.

I feel like if they did the ads right, (in-house, with non-insulting geotargeting), or offered a subscription price closer to one latté per month, I would have a lot less animosity and be more supportive of this move.

I wonder if they can see if I've gone off to some other tab to wait while they take their time getting me an answer.

The accuracy isn't as great as existing systems, but it also can't be turned off by "the west."

For consumers, if a device supports all the systems, (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and Beidou), would we be able to get greater accuracy, or if not greater accuracy, get our location faster than before?

I thought it was something like that - it used to be owned by a conglomerate of major Canadian breweries, but through sales & mergers it's ended up as InBev & MolsonCoors.

Yet they still have a near-monopoly on beer sales!

At least until April, a government website is the only legal way to buy pot in Ontario. Since they're selling it, they set the prices.

In a lot of provinces the only legal way to get pot is through a government pot store. Alcohol works the same way; Ontario recently allowed the sales of wine & beer in some grocery stores, but everything else is at the LCBO, (government liquor stores), and the Beer Store, (which I think might be government run, but even if not it pretty much has a monopoly on beer sales).

So if he's banned from running a public company, could he... take Tesla private?

It's not Apple that's using his stuff, it's the end user. Apple is providing software that enables the user to do so, but saying "Apple's using your stuff" here is like saying Mozilla foundation is "using your stuff" every time someone visits the website with Firefox or Thomas E. Dickey is "using your stuff" every time someone visits the website using Lynx.

It would be cool if Apple had reached out to him, but as other commenters have mentioned this integration has existed for a long time in the Workflow app, so it's not even new.

This would actually cross the line. Right now there's a strong argument that Shortcuts is just acting as an images-only web browser, (like Lynx, but the opposite). If Apple actually copied the images to their own servers then they're copying the author's work without his authorization.

Just tried to do a search, got no results. Google search found me the product page, (which worked).

If you can't even search for products, there's a problem!

It probably means he was hoping for a fun surprise, (Something like You're 10% Inca!), but didn't get one.

I did the same thing - my Ancestry test came back with a whole lot of "Western Europe" - even more than I expected, actually.

It makes fairly logical sense. Neanderthals were fairly well-installed in Europe when modern humans appeared in Africa. As modern humans would have expanded northward into Europe, done their thing with the Neanderthals, (some breeding, lots of killing), and continued eastward, so the human population still in Africa would probably have no Neanderthal DNA, but the population in Asia would carry the results of some interbreeding with Neanderthals.

The question this brings up is how different are Neanderthals from Homo sapiens? I was taught that the definition of a species is that two individuals could reproduce and have fertile offspring. It seems there are exceptions to this rule, (as Neanderthals and Homo sapiens are different species).

From the Wikipedia link: "Trichothecenes are a very large family of chemically related mycotoxins produced by various species of Fusarium, Myrothecium, Trichoderma, ..."

Wikipedia says that Fumosins also come from Fusarium, so it looks like one particular group of mycotoxins is reduced.

Granted, Fusarium is a problem in gardens all over, (Fusarium Wilt will kill almost any food plant), but still, if all we're doing is sort-of beating one particular plant ailment it might be worth a cost-benefit analysis, externalizing as little as possible.

The TL;DR:

There are 2 types of GMO corn: Insect Resistant and Glyphosate Resistant, (Glyphosate is a herbicide, so it can be sprayed on fields killing weeds but not resistant corn).

Corn resistant to pests has less loss, therefore higher yield. Also, since there's less insect damage, there's less chance for rot, and therefore fewer mycotoxins, (mycotoxins = toxins that come from fungus). It also hasn't been sprayed with as many pesticides as a non-resistant variety would be, so there's less actual poison on the corn.

Corn with no competition from weeds has higher yield, and glyphosate makes it really easy to kill everything else in the field.

More corn = more food = better health.

Let's pick this apart a bit!

Ignoring the lobbyist domain, since the study also appears in Nature[1], there are some sneaky twists here:

> GMO corn crops had lower percentages of mycotoxins (-28.8 percent), fumonisins (-30.6 percent) and thricotecens (−36.5 percent), all of which can lead to economic losses and harm human and animal health

Fumonisins are a class of mycotoxins, so that 30.6% reduction is already included in the 28.8% reduction of mycotoxins.

The word "Thricotecens" only appears in Google as part of this study, and isn't in my computer's dictionary. Is there a scientist that can explain what it is? Is it another sub-group of mycotoxins?

Is it a good idea to be consuming corn that grew up with glyphosate[2] in the fields? It seems pretty poisonous, and I didn't see anything about balancing the benefits of more corn vs. less glyphosate.

We can also talk about if having more corn in our diet is really a good idea if we want, (spoiler: generally no, especially if you live in North America).

[1]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-21284-2 [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate

Which may not be large enough: http://www.todayonline.com/world/tokyo-preparing-floods-beyo...

The article’s short on details - it’s not even clear if this was actually a remote hack - I always thought you neede physical access to change these, (but that once you have access making a change is trivial).

I know one who left to become a chocolatier.

User-friendly, but blocks port 22, so if you need SSH and can't change the port, try something else.

Looks like they just took the page down as I was poking around trying to figure out where the redirect(s) came from.

Edit: Of course the error message is truthful:

>The Equifax.com website and Equifax Member Center are experiencing unusually high volumes due to responses to the recently announced Cybersecurity Incident. We are working diligently to better serve you, and apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. We appreciate your patience during this time and ask that you check back with us soon.

/s