Wait... aren't AC's one of the prevalent causes of global warming, so in effect partly causing more heat related deaths?
And what about stress caused by noise pollution from AC's?
I think we need less units - not more.
Technically, but in practice....
On top of that the production of AC's is also a factor, and there is the spilling of the refrigerant liquids that only recently became much less damaging.
I’ve wondered about this many times. How much would the world cool if we turned the HVAC off for a week, a month, permanently? I mean, we watched as the natural world breathed a sigh of relief on 9/11 as all planes were grounded. We watched nature reassert itself in places humans vacated during COVID. So why not HVAC?
Exactly, Windows 2000 was such a comfortable workhorse. And lightning fast, it made me doubt why I was a Mac head. I switched briefly until OS X grew up and surpassed any version of Windows in reliability and versatility (for me).
Touch typing... I'm embarrassed to confess I'm still typing with just 4 fingers while keeping my eyes on the keyboard instead of the screen.
Although I doubt it would require 100 hours to learn.
Just a few days ago I started using Keybr to learn to touch type. It frustrates me less than any other program I've used before, so far. I'm touch-typing this comment... slowly ;)
I can type quickly through my own means but very inaccurately. In a recent fast-paced online game the other players assumed I wasn't a native English speaker due to all my typos. I was a Vim user for ten years and would constantly mash the wrong keys. After starting touch-typing a few days ago, I redownloaded the old Vimfx extension to control my web browser from my keyboard. It ended up requiring me to switch to a Firefox fork called Waterfox though, as the modern (post-2017) extensions have to rely on injecting Javascript into the page and don't work well.
If you're going to learn it, use at least a split columnar keyboard and a non qwerty layout. Learning to touch type on a regular keyboard will likely worsen your health compared to your four finger hunt and peck due to the bad uncomfortable qwerty touch typing enforces. Think about the awful pinky curls and reaches. Ouch!
I'm almost 40 and have no issues with this yet. Colemak is my favorite non-QWERTY and feels smooth, but sadly, programming was designed with QWERTY in mind. The 30% comfort improvement wasn't really worth it and there's a speed drop because I've been on QWERTY since 5 years old. I also use my laptop in well, laptop mode half the time, so eventually I went back to QWERTY.
But it's actually surprising on mobile how much easier a non-QWERTY keyboard is considering it's two thumbs and your thumbs are at the pinky areas most of the time.
spread dev pinky awareness whenever possible, we need a ribbon..the struggle is real and its a sign of excessive copy pasting. customized split keyboard is the cure so bring on the subsidized moonlanders for all
I think subsidized svalboards are far better. Moonlanders are an evolution to the standard keyboard design, but a svalboard is a step function improvement - a true keyboard revolution.
It took me a few months on keybr honestly when I got a new, ergonomic keyboard. The problem with ergo keyboards is they're split at the middle and suddenly my left hand couldn't reach for what was on the right side like it normally would and I had never realized I was doing it "wrong" all this time.
A portion of dietary cholesterol is directly absorbed and increases your serum LDL-c. Especially an issue if you have the Lp-a mutation that increases this turnover.
Though I think it's more useful to consider what you could replace it with if you did want to do the optimization.
I've been fiber-maxing and ApoB-minimizing for years and my breakfast lately is usually a large bowl oats + mix-ins, a tofu scramble, or a tempeh dish. According to cronometer, they have similar nutrition and calorie profile of six eggs, except they have fiber and other perks.
The downside is that it took quite a bit of motivated behavioral change to end up with new dietary staples having grown up in our egg-heavy culture.
With “it’s better for yourself” I’m not just referring to nutrition. Animal agriculture is devastating for the world, including the environment around you.
Also I think for most (dare I say ‘well informed’) people it would be an ethical relieve to stop consuming eggs and other animal products.
And yes: there are (nutritional) concerns around eggs; for example concerning salmonella, cholesterol and saturated fats. Although I should mention science is not unanimous regarding all of those subjects.
But science is clear about one thing: bird flu is not to take lightly.
Modest egg consumption has a negligible impact on cholesterol. Most blood cholesterol is produced by your liver, impacted far more by other variables. Eggs are also not that high in fat.
As I said: science is not unanimous regarding that, but I think my other arguments are more important.
And personally I don't care about the debate around the nutritional value of eggs. I just avoid animal products because I don't want to contribute to the hell that animal agriculture is.
Personally I am just choosy about where I purchase my animal products. You can visit some farms yourself. Of course if you're of a certain disposition, you won't want to do that anyway.
“Some farms”. That’s the crux. I would not believe the "small family farm is OK" myth.
If only people would be exposed to what’s really going on anywhere else in enormous & secretive animal industry - not just some cherry picked farms, it would paint a completely different picture.
Gp is not saying that every farm exactly like the small family farm. In fact they are saying the opposite. You need to look at them individually, because they are not all the same as you are suggesting, any more than the passionate open source developer making a small living on donations is the same as a giant tech Corp making billions on vacuuming up people's data and "monetizing" it.
I think the bulk of the animal industry and farming industry are despicable and cruel. I think they essentially low-grade poison our food in order to squeeze unnatural levels of production out of goods. Without a doubt, they torture animals in order to increase yield and maximize it to the space. This is grotesque and awful in my opinion.
But there are people who are trying to do it a good way. If you believe that any sort of animal husbandry is evil, then go ahead and lump all the farms in together. But if you aren't that extreme, then there is a huge difference between some of the players.
I will dig into the meta a bit here, because both it, and one of your points is interesting.
When I read things like "animal agriculture being devastating for the world including the environment", it rings true, and makes me want to dig further, support this any way I can etc. The conflation with the (IMO hella sus) health arguments makes me question the judgment and intent of the writer, and second-guess my initial agreement.
I would find it easier to sympathize with the main purpose, if it was left to stand on its own. Trust is an important concept in human interactions.
*Reading further posts in this thread, I'm going to double down and add my own frustration: I really want to support this cause and perspective, but I hesitate because I consistently get signals that the people who promote it are arguing in bad faith.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'll consider your point. Although, just like a few other responses here it has the smell of a red herring to it, by shifting the focus from a inconvenient message to the form of that message.
This rhetoric is old. You can thrive on a vegan diet very easily without this careful calibration you speak of. The same could be said for common western diets with poor nutrition.
It’s true that you can’t just go plant based by just ditching the animal based components: you have to substitute them. But that’s an increasingly easy thing to do these days.
From my perspective, your point can be regarded as a myth.
But even if it wasn’t mostly a myth: I rather spend a little more effort on balanced nutrition than contributing to the immensely violent system that animal agriculture is.
Eggs have obvious health benefits. Land encroachment + emissions is modest, and notwithstanding, that's just something to manage, not avoid altogether. Everything we demand for ourselves encroaches on land.
Judging from the headline (I'm not going to read PETA), this is about the issues pertaining to the wellbeing of chickens, not the other externalities I actually mentioned.
Land use for animal agriculture has shrunk over time in the US. Methane is highest for cows, not that high with chickens. With the right practices (admittedly, they aren't migrating the clocks to fertilize land) this could be carbon-neutral, but notwithstanding, methane does not persist in the atmosphere nearly as long as CO2 does.
It's a clickbaity title indeed. But a pretty complete picture. Not a pleasant read of course. I'm sure you can find other sources yourself that offend you less than Peta does.
PETA is full of shit, to the point where you could probably safely take on the opposite of their position on any given issue and presume to be correct, generally.
I use Parallels, VMware, UTM and Wine-based solutions for a bunch of applications and games. If you don't mind a bit of tinkering here and there the results can be pretty good.
Unfortunately booting into Windows is not possible on Apple Silicon Macs yet. But there are many other options to run Windows or Windows software - including AAA games.
