lvs

Subspace?

222 nm?? No way jose. Free radicals don't just stay where you generate them. Even if the UV dose is minimal below a few layers of cells, it doesn't mean that radical damage does not reach live epidermal layers. Just using ventilation is a lot safer and has no real downsides.

Except the current use of the byproduct is not just flaring it off pointlessly as waste. The byproduct is being burned as a fuel, which in that usage is already (nearly) neutral. If an alternative fuel has to be used instead, that fuel is more than likely going to be natural gas or coal.

This was my first reaction as well. I think the subtext is that the byproduct is currently being burned as a fuel source, which is common for things like sawdust in mills. So there's one aspect of this calculation that could be waaay off. If the mills that would have burned this byproduct in a boiler are selling it instead, they'll need another energy source for their boilers! If that energy source is a fossil fuel instead of a wood byproduct, then this "upcycling" has inadvertently become carbon positive (or perhaps neutral at best). And it will be a lot easier to retrofit an industrial boiler for natural gas than to convert it to electric. Even if it were electric, most of the world does not remotely have as clean a grid as Norway's. So it would be some decades before any carbon advantage emerges.

Why should we pay any attention to someone who needs get only one prediction right? That suggests a probability of correct predictions that approaches zero. Let me know when a prediction comes out true. I would be foolish to pay any attention before then.

One guy who makes grandiose predictions about the future convinced another guy who pretends to be a philosopher. It's the blind leading the blind. In truth, they both just make bets as any gambler does.

You probably only have a few services that you genuinely want the TV to reach. If I had a "smart" TV, I think I'd go with a whitelisting approach instead.

No, the problem has been that the variant vaccines have not shown superior responses to variants vs. the original spike isolate in preclinical and small trials.

Incognito/private browsing is another workaround.

> they do sequester carbon by consuming carbon stores

They can't sequester any more carbon than was in the feed stock. And when you're trying to sell a biodegradable thing (which I think is laudable), this would have a minimal net effect on carbon for a material that is readily disposed and biodegrades within a few weeks. The benefits of reducing plastic waste, landfill, and pollution are obvious. The carbon benefits are less clear. Paper packaging from pulp waste comes directly from a photosynthetic resource, and may be found to be equivalent materials. So the argument for mushrooms as an intermediate seems like it needs more explanation -- to me anyway. Obviously, a bioplastic that never degrades is a far better carbon sink than a material that degrades readily, but then you are generating waste that must be stored somewhere indefinitely. Not a problem for a building material, but obviously not great for packaging. But I don't see how a building material made from mushrooms could ever sequester more carbon than, you know, wood.

> If cement manufacturing alone were a country, it would be the third-largest emitter of CO2 on the planet. Since mushrooms are relatively easy to feed, can be grown anywhere, and are appealing to increasingly environmentally aware consumers, we expect to see significant growth in mushroom tech solutions in building materials.

Mushrooms are not plants. They don't photosynthesize and fix carbon dioxide from the air. Growing mushrooms is still carbon positive. It's important to understand that this is an organism that respires, so these generic claims about a carbon benefit need much more analysis to understand whether there is in fact a benefit at scale.

I think you may have a reading comprehension issue, but this clearly isn't a conversation worth having.

You do realize that this advice is supposed to apply for some time into the future, i.e. potentially during the next wave, right? Risk assessments are fluid and change with conditions. Covid precaution hostility is not rational.

What is with this bizarre internet obsession with drug repurposing? Let the research work its way through the system before getting hyped on any particular drug for any particular indication. This community is simply not equipped to evaluate the kind of intermediate proposals that researchers make in the literature. You have to watch hundreds of these boom-bust cycles for drugs and targets to get some perspective on what real looks like.

Investors hack your mind with ambiguity disguised as genius. It's just a guy marketing himself and his investments on social media. Why do you care?

I hope this is indexable by Google/Duck so it can be found when needed...

Everyone is saying laundering, but wash or related parties is much more likely. The principal invested parties in NFTs desperately need to maintain transaction volume to pretend this is a real thing in which real people are really engaging.

The NIH has been narrowing the scope of primate research for some time. Several years ago, they announced they'll no longer fund invasive chimp work. There are regular scandals about the conditions or experimentation on primates that crop up every couple of years.

As far as "research outcome value," unfortunately this is notoriously difficult to quantify for all aspects of the research enterprise. Most of the metrics typically used are abysmal for any serious utilitarian analysis (e.g. publication count, references to those publications, patents approved, funding raised, etc.). And you would not be surprised to hear stories very similar to this one quietly passed around in both academic and industry contexts, where consequences are few if any. It makes many people uncomfortable, but the power dynamics are such that they continue so long as they continue to support career advancement and continue to be approved by IRBs and funding agencies. That's not to justify what's being reported here-- far from it. If anything, I would support a broad ban on primate experimentation with few exceptions.

If one is concerned about the impact of swap activity, is there a reason not to just use a dedicated swap device?

This is normally when regulators step in.

2017

You seem really defensive about all this. The question at the top of the thread was a little too binary. But the notion that advertising is overvalued would not surprise me at all, nor would it surprise me that many in here depend for their livelihoods on it continuing to be overvalued.

There are both US and EU sanctions on Belarusian individuals and entities, but no broad sanctions that would apply to all developers in the country of which I'm aware. This seems like it might be an error.

Oh Wine is still incredibly buggy, but I'm still a big supporter obviously. Even Microsoft and Adobe products work barely with exactly the right versions and winetricks with the occasional tinkering, interface bugs, crashes. These are bugs that haven't been fixed in many years. I think an interesting development target for them would just be to choose the top 25 productivity apps and make the last 3 or 4 versions work smoothly without requiring users to spend time troubleshooting the installation, activation, getting standard app functions to work, etc..

Valve has leverage with game developers who rely on Steam for distribution to work together to get games working in Proton, but the same relationship doesn't exist for other non-native apps and Wine. So the development really needs to happen on the wine side.

Isn't the preferred solution just to continue hacking at Wine? With Proton going big this year, I'm hopeful that the non-gaming side of Wine is going to start getting more and more development attention soon. The performance is so much better than virtualization. Fingers crossed.

See the Bayh-Dole Act.

Yes, now you're grasping what everyone is complaining about.

Downloading a rom from an internet forum to stay up to date with security patches seems like potentially flawed logic.

This document is incomprehensible. I have no idea what happened here. It seems to be written for a reader who already knows every detail of a saga.

Have you heard of books?