I have a similar setup. Corne keyboard, trackball mouse, portable laptop stand. Never had an issue with TSA. I don't even bother taking the keyboard out of my bag since each half is roughly the size of a cell phone
I don't think replacing oxygen in the brain is the main mechanism of action (in medical settings they mix nitrous and oxygen and it's still effective without risking hypoxia). Looking at Wikipedia it says the mechanism of action isn't fully understood but it says the effects "are likely caused mainly via inhibition of NMDA receptor-mediated currents".
I've been under the impression that biggest risk of long term use of nitrous is that it causes b12 deficiency which is really bad for your nervous system. Wikipedia also mentions that NMDA receptor antagonist in general are neurotoxic and studies in mice suggest that nitrous has this neurotoxicity.
It absolutely does, and with the recent uptick in recreational nitrous use we have clear examples of what it does to people. This is just one of the handful of cases of nitrous overuse leading to long term mobility loss
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. That article appears to be about a women who is now in a wheel chair due to nerve damage caused by a b12 deficiency which supports my comment that one of the most concerning risks of nitrous use is b12 deficiency.
... you all realize that phi is barely a better approximation than 8/5, right? 1.6 vs 1.609 (km in a mile) vs 1.618?
(8/5)/(1 mile/1 km) = 0.9942; (1 mile/1 km)/phi = 0.9946. You're making things way harder on yourself for essentially no improvement in precision, especially when you're just rounding to the nearest whole number.
I'm way out of my depth here but I believe this would function as a very sensitive accelerometer. The rubidium would be still relative to the lasers so when you accelerated, it would have inertia and take some time to catch up with the rest of the device. You'd then integrate the acceleration to find the velocity and integrate that to find position.
Yeah, it is an extremely sensitive accelerometer which it calls out about halfway through the article.
"At the heart of the quantum compass – which could be ready for widespread use in a few years – is a device known as an accelerometer that can measure how an object’s velocity changes over time."
I've been using kagi and that's my biggest complaint. Upgrading from the basic plan seems like a lot of money but being on the basic plan, I have mental friction every time I do a search because I have anxiety about running out of searches. I actually haven't ran out in the 3 months I've been using it for but I don't like the anxiety 300 searches/month creates for me and maybe I would run out if I didn't have the anxiety limiting me
I just paid for the new unlimited plan, and haven’t looked back. I agree about the 300 searches per month thing. I feel like I run many more than that, but haven’t counted.
I just went back to starter from ultimate because they are now adding 19%(?)VAT in Germany and so I resumed paying for gpt4 which adds dall e for 7 euro less (22 openai, 29 Kagi ultimate) IF I stick to 10 searches a day. I forgot about this new distribution setup immediately and prompted by this thread I now find that in the first 6 days back on starter I used 11 searches per day so there is hope.
I had tried using Kagi just for home use since the bulk of my searches are work related (Kagi is not something I can claim as an expense, before you ask) but still found little added value beyond "I think I like this more".
I did also try a bunch of side by side searches "for work" (so mostly leading to stack overflow) and they were the same results, more or less, for my searches between Kagi and Startpage.
One thing I found myself doing as I became conscious of my search quota limitations is going directly to sites and searching there using the local search. This doesn't seem like a bad thing but it's one more step in an already friction filled process. :)
The article also claims they were imported from China. They also said samples were sent for genetic testing and confirmed they were of the species Morchella sextelata. Not sure if that is what you're referring to as a species with a higher hydrazine content but I agree with you that you should be cooking them regardless and it's strange to me that they were serving them raw.
Asimov wrote an essay called "relativity of wrong" that I think does a good job of capturing the changes our understanding of the world goes through.
Yes, Einstein's theory of relativity was a change from Newtonian physics but it's a fairly minor correction for most practical purposes and Newtonian physics is still important to know and understand.
So yeah, our understanding of physics will likely change but it'll only matter in more and more extreme edge cases and will likely build on our current understanding. Maybe it'll result in us finally having fusion reactor, room temperature super conductors, or quantum computers but you're still going to get a roughly parabolic arc when you throw a ball through the air.
Doesn't having those numbers available help you ask questions like "why are houses of worship more likely to install solar panels than a warehouse?" which could possibly point towards answers to the question "how can we increase the percent of warehouses that are installing solar panels?" Maybe it doesn't lead to anything (many churches are more motivated by ideals and less motivated by profit than a warehouse) but studying outlier categories even if they're minorities seems like a reasonable thing to do.
Yes, you have a point there, but I think my gripe is that the numbers are so tiny as to be potential rounding errors on an otherwise pretty self-evident hypothesis: that solar subsidies (like direct pay) increase solar installations. We've known that for decades already.
If there were something special about HoW that make them disproportionately susceptible to subsidy-driven PV, that would be an interesting finding... but I don't think you can make that determination on 1.9% of 0.6%.
Still, you have a point. If nobody studied this, we wouldn't know if that was 1.9% of 0.6% or 90% of 50%. And maybe the numbers will change in the coming years, and this gives us a great baseline starting point.
Where exactly is the line drawn for how much and what type of human intervention is required? When I cook food, human intervention is causing chemical reactions that change the composition of the food. I doubt many people consider grill marks to be unnatural or synthetic.
I think the line is typically drawn at any human intervention. I doubt many humans consider steaks to be a naturally occurring phenomenon.
Now, there is a secondary fuzzy notion of "artificial" typically used in relation to "chemicals". I don't think that definition stands up to most serious scrutiny, and is at any rate unrelated to this article.
That's exactly what's being—albeit atypically—advocated for here: That even steaks are a naturally occurring byproduct of humans and cows because humans and cows naturally exist.
Sure, but then of course absolutely everything is "naturally occurring". Plastic is a naturally occurring substance, computers are naturally occurring objects, C++ is a natural language. Perhaps then only miracles from God (for those who believe in such things) are unnatural?
Plenty of people do not believe the conceptualization of a natural/synthetic divide does any good. There are entire subsets of philosophy, feminism, cyborg theory, etc. which talk about this.
What genes do you think we should be testing for and which ones do you think are severe enough that you parents with those genes shouldn't have children?
Almost everyone has some sort of gene that isn't great. They might have a family history of Alzheimer's, maybe a family history or some sort of cancer, or bipolar disorder, or any other of 100 different serious illnesses. Humans would go extinct if we only allowed those with perfect genes to reproduce.
Oh, and with sickle cell, you're going to be in particularly hot water with suggestions like that given the fact it's mostly African Americans who have the gene.
I doubt this. If majority of population had severe incurable diseases then humanity wouldn't survive, and healthcare would collapse. I think (sorry, no statistics) that majority of population are healthy enough to do hard physical work.
I never said the majority of the population has severe incurable diseases. I said that have genes that aren't great (maybe they have a predisposition for certain diseases or they're a carrier but are healthy themselves).
Also, many diseases don't effect you until after you're past reproductive age. Evolution doesn't care if you get Alzheimer's at 70 but it still has a fairly large burden on our modern day society.
Sickle cell is particularly interesting because the gene that causes it makes the carriers less susceptible to malaria. So there actually was an evolutionary pressure for people in areas with high levels of malaria to have it (which is why it's so common among African Americans). Apparently it's better to die of sickle cell at 40 after you've had kids then die of malaria when your 10.
