B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
new word
A-R-T-I-S-T
Spells BULLSHIT ARTIST.
I say again, BULLSHIT ARTIST.

This is a great article that breaks down land use.

https://ourworldindata.org/global-land-for-agriculture

44% of habitable land is used for human agriculture. Most of that is used for livestock. One thousand years ago, only 4% of habitable land was used for human agriculture. Humans are the leading cause of habitat loss, which has lead to the fastest decline in biodiversity and ecological stability in history. Modern agriculture is one of the largest contributors to our climate and chemical problems, too.

There is a real reason to not use the “C + P” initialism in online chat these days… on some platforms it’s likely to be flagged & reported by automods/bots/Eye of Sauron.

What you’re describing isn’t really a failure of the education system. It’s a reflection of the average American mindset. I was born in the US and grew up in the public school system. I loved math and science, and while I struggled with the rules of grammar, I still loved reading. I have always had a love of learning new things.

But most people aren’t like that. Not just in America, but across the world. A true love of learning is rare, and I think that’s because learning is hard. It requires humility, effort, and the being able to admit that one might be wrong. It means questioning long held beliefs and sometimes changing parts of yourself completely. That’s a deeply uncomfortable prospect and many people avoid it.

I think most people fall sleep while leaning on the third tier of Maslow’s pyramid (belonging and social identity.) The next level, where self-reflection and self-actualization begins, is hard to climb because it means hanging question marks on their long-held ideas and beliefs. They choose the safety of clinging to comfort and routine.

The current controversy over dismantling the US Department of Education is a complex issue that can’t be fully unpacked in a short reply on the internet. But in my view, what’s driving the American zeitgeist toward authoritarianism and anti-intellectualism is this resistance to growth and change. Internalizing new ideas means re-evaluating what you’ve always believed. For many, that feels like a threat. And instead of rising to meet the challenge, they’d rather pull everything down to their level, where they feel safe.

But, at least for me, the climb is worth it. Continuing to learn means accepting discomfort. It means growing past who you were in order to become someone better. It’s how we find purpose, empathy, and a deeper understanding of what it means to be alive.

Between all the microplastics, digital babysitting, and the department of education, the US had to dumb down its toys or risk alienating the target market. Regarding the lower quality chocolate, they’ve begun adding crayons directly to the mix so the children grow to become better marine recruits.

obligatory /s

The spacecraft uses radioisotope thermoelectric generators. It converts the heat generated by radioactive decay of plutonium into electricity. Engineers have been able to keep it working all this time by selectively powering down unused systems.

Why go to a show when the replay button is, like, right there?

That’s weird, guy.

I’ll take “Hyperbolic & Catastrophic Exaggerations” for $400, Alex.
I’m pretty sure you’re reply is tongue-in-cheek, but that did get me thinking how long it would take to actually destroy the Moon by mining.

Let’s say we used mass drivers to launch 1000kg of material from the Moon to the Earth every second, non stop, until the Moon was completely dismantled. The moon has a mass somewhere around 7.35×10²² kilograms. Dividing the Moon’s mass by the rate of removal, we get Time=7.35×10¹⁹seconds. Divide that by 35,536,000 seconds in a year, and it would take us about 2.33 trillion years to dismantle the moon.

Considering how the Earth only has, maybe, a billion years until the Sun’s natural life cycle makes life on Earth impossible, I’d wager that we’re good. Drill baby, drill.

I feel this. There was one time where I was playing metal over my speakers, but I was the only one in the office and I was not playing it loudly. After a while a security guard was doing rounds and asked me “what the hell” I was listening to. “Cattle Decapitation,” I said, and they wrinkled their nose like someone shat in the trashcan and went on about how they can’t how anyone would like “that stuff” – I shrugged and said me neither and got back to my work.

I get the Tesla hate, I’m also not a fan of Musk and his antics, but can you share a source that says Tesla are inherently worse in crashes than other vehicles? The NHTSA gives overall 5-star safety ratings to Teslas, the highest score possible; the leader of the NHTSA is notoriously anti-Tesla (because of Musk’s antics), and is on record saying that she wants to reign him and the company in (and rightfully so).

From this article: https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/18/business/why-do-people-keep-crashing-teslas/index.html

The Highway Loss Data Institute, a US-based organization funded by the insurance industry, has not found higher crash rates for Tesla vehicles or other EVs more broadly based on overall insurance claims. Teslas do tend to have higher claim costs, though, according to the HLDI.

The article goes on to say that research indicates that the likely cause of a higher rate of EV crashes is drivers 1) not being accustomed to the differences between EV and ICE vehicle handling, and 2) EVs overall having more speed and power than ICE vehicles.

there is a long-established connection between horsepower and the frequency and amount of insurance claims. Fast cars hit things more often and they hit them harder, leading to more – and more severe – crashes. Added to this, EVs lack the usual engine sounds that go along with rapid acceleration and high speeds, so it’s conceivable drivers are less aware of how fast they’re going.

I’m interested in learning more about how EV crashes seem to be worse.

deleted by creator

If only; that would be some tasty irony for a theology degree-holding judge

The purpose of prison ought to be reconciliation and rehabilitation, not revenge or forced contrition. Many prisoners do feel remorse for their crimes, but unfortunately recidivism is so high (in America) because our socioeconomic and judicial systems are tooled to undermine a parolee’s attempts to reintegrate into society, setting them up for failure.

Only in extreme circumstances, i.e. truly sociopathic criminals, should sentences that remove all hope of reintegration or release be issued. True sociopaths are incapable of feeling remorse, no matter how long or under whatever conditions they are kept. They do understand the weight and impact their crimes had on their victims, but they do not care. No amount of coercion will change that. In these fringe cases, I’d argue that giving them the choice between lifelong sequestration or self-inflicted suicide is ostensibly the best solution for everyone.

Ah, a classic. ALF truly is timeless.

When I was a kid, I was scared of spiders, house centipedes, and heights. On a school trip to a tall building, I was terrified but eventually worked up the courage to look over the edge. The fear disappeared, and I realized that if I could overcome that, maybe I could face other fears too. So, I started learning about the things that scared me; spiders, centipedes, the dark, etc. I found that the more I learned about something, the less frightening they became. For example, house centipedes are harmless, clean, and even help by getting rid of destructive pests. Understanding really helps ease fear. It confuses me that some people seem to want to stay afraid instead of trying to overcome it.