I once read that if acetaminophen were introduced today it 100% would require a prescription because of how dangerous an overdose is.
Unrelated, but it feels like an oversight that this article said nothing about how both acetaminophen and ibuprofen reduce fevers. They aren't used solely for reducing pain.
I kind of doubt that, to be honest, given how much more effective and less directly damaging it is during normal use compared to NSAIDs.
I find it interesting that people take these as fever reduction mechanisms. Fevers are a defence mechanism, not just an inconvenience. Maybe it makes more sense in places without decent workers' rights (like having a limited amount of sick days you need to manage), but it feels weird for me to actively harm your body's defence mechanisms unless you're in "you should see a doctor" territory already.
I reluctantly stopped using mercurial 10 or so years ago, and reading this brings a little tear to my eye. Mercurial was just about where jj seems to be now. It had revsets. It had just gotten the concept of mutable and immutable commits. It had absorb. It had bookmarks. It never had an "index". The commands had human readable options like I see in this post. It could work with git repositories. Man I miss it.
I'm hesitant to pick jj up in case it ends up losing to git like mercurial did. But it's very tempting.
According to the guy who wrote JJ, he copied all the ideas you mentioned from hg. That included a lot of ideas from hg's add ons. So the similarities are no accident. But then he added a twist - he didn't just delete the index, he dropped "hg commit" as well.
I can't see it going anywhere. It is in many ways "just" a different porcelain for git. The plumbing is the same. It's also safer to use: no JJ command can lose data another JJ command can't recover.
> How is it decentralization
Producers of electricity being everywhere is more distributed than relatively centralized power generation stations. Regardless of who paid (part of) it
The technologies for renewable energy are inherently more decentralized than those for fossil fuels. My point was clearly this and nothing else: given that there are subsidies for both, a libertarian should be less upset about renewable subsidies since it is an enabling force for individual liberties when it comes to energy production. In practice, they are very outspoken about renewable subsidies and fairly quiet on oil subsidies.
I think you are talking about a different sort of decentralization than libertarians talk about, maybe?
Libertarians want decentralized political/coercive power. When the government is paying for power generation in smaller amounts at larger numbers of locations that's not decentralizing the governments political/coercive power.
And again, I can't imagine a libertarian who when questioned would be ok with oil subsidies. Point them my way and I'll give them a stern talking to.
We can make oil from biomass by heating it up in a kiln, and we can do it quickly. Oil is totally renewable. It's weird to me that we are fixating on renewable when the problem is carbon gas, isn't it?
No, coal and oil is not. Since we have micro organisms that can consume wood, coal and oil will never be produced again.
> During the Carboniferous period, massive amounts of plant matter accumulated to form coal because microorganisms and fungi had not yet evolved the ability to break down lignin, a tough, aromatic polymer in woody plants.
We can make synthetic oil and I think we can also make synthetic coal, too.
Though it's close to useless because at that point they're too expensive to be worth it for anything else than very niche uses that absolutely require them.
> We can make synthetic oil and I think we can also make synthetic coal, too.
IIRC, that's basically what charcoal is. Except charcoal is cleaner once made, because most of the nasty stuff happens while being made from the source plant material.
Sure, but the problem with coal and oil is not their chemical composition, per se. The problem with specifically fossil coal and oil is that the carbon atoms used to be buried deep underground and end up as part of CO2 molecules in the atmosphere. Making synthetic kerosene for jet engines is one of the top contenders for long-distance air travel in a post-fossil fuel world, IMO.
To be clear, I'm in favor of nuclear, but people attack it saying it does change the local ecosystem (heating up water for cooling and pumping the warm water into rivers, and of course the nuclear waste).
Here we just had someone say that hydro is fine because it only changes the local ecosystem so I jumped on that line of reasoning. I would argue with you that nuclear changes the local ecosystem way, way less than a dam does and so it's even better.
It has indeed been baffling. Ad I dig deeper into what developers are doing with AI, it's basically like what I did customizing and tweaking emacs when I was younger (and fine, I'll admit I still do it sometimes). They are having so much fun playing with these new tools that they aren't really noticing how little the new tools are actually helping them
Unrelated, but it feels like an oversight that this article said nothing about how both acetaminophen and ibuprofen reduce fevers. They aren't used solely for reducing pain.
reply