I don't think anyone has a single agreed upon number for the water consumption, with the higher estimates focusing on a lot of wider externalities and the lower estimates ignoring them, such as ignoring the cost of training.
I think you're missing the actual problem. It's not great that idiots now have the power to photoshop images, the real problem is that those idiots who would do that have been given the power to run the country.
Nah, the differences that can make for a dynamic friendship can be the ones that prevent cohabitation. If you're friends you don't have to care that they like to play loud music at 2 am, but you do when you live together.
I have/had friends whose pickiness/slovenliness was fine until we tried to live together, and then all that became a personality clash. It's entirely possible to have strong friendships with people you couldn't live with.
Just like any weight loss and gain, this is the sort of things that happens over years. You lose the weight, then five years later realize your weight has started creeping back up. Once you're heavy the battle never really ends.
If I go for a 10k, I burn ~1100 calories (I'm a big dude). I can eat that deficit no problem, hell, I was able to maintain my weight during my marathon training last summer.
It's always a balance, there's always nuance, and there's no one single solution.
I don't think "addictive" is the right term, but we have an evolutionary imperative towards eating to excess when there is food in excess, which wasn't maladaptive until recently.
This would kind of be the same as us (I'm Canadian too) registering with the NDP so we can vote for the next leader. But the level of lying on display here is just insane.
I don't know if the fact that it fully slipped into the absurd or the fact that it probably still worked on people is sadder.
I do love the idea of voter registration oscillating back and fourth at 20 minutes intervals forever. Would make voting in the primaries way more exciting as the voter base kept flipping.
Philosophically fun, sure, but the article also points out that another vector was "Your language settings have been changed to Spanish", so I don't know if it's as profound as you're making it out to be. Anything that makes us panic can be a vector.
Don't like that. I'm of the "if you're going to do something important, do it on your PC" generation. I do not want a future where I lose my phone and I can no longer access my bank.
The rate of being killed is pretty damn high in your circle? What is s/killed? Or is it just a harassment issue? If it's so high, why keep doing it? I'm struggling to understand the risk/reward, and what the risk actually is compared to what it's perceived to be.
I wonder what the rate of "getting killed by some rando along the way" actually is. Sure, lots of anecdotes, and I don't really know how you'd measure it, but I'm curious how it plays out by the real numbers.
I get it, it's an irrational desire, but with the timespans we're talking the evolutionary distance is greater than that between us and whatever fuzzy things was scurrying under the feet of the T-Rex.
If we're thinking that far out we might as well all just lay down and wait for rain because there's no avoiding the heat death of the universe. Treating the sun dying out like it's a real concern that we need to address in the next 2, 200, 2,000, or 2,000,000 years is comical. Whatever is around to experience that won't be human as we know it.
But the effects aren't just financial, look in an ER. People who for one reason or another haven't been able to take care of themselves in the emergency room for things that aren't an emergency, and it means your standard of care is going to take a hit.
The mental model of subscriptions and financing are totally different. If I'm paying a subscription I might cancel next month, and that's a sort of freedom. If I'm financing a piece of hardware I don't want to stop paying, I want that hardware, so that's a commitment.
I've been using Claude sonnet 4.5 lately and I've noticed a tendency for it to create tests that prove themselves. Rather than calling the function we're hoping to test, it re-implements the code in the test and then tests it there. It's helpful, and it usually works very well if you have well defined inputs and outputs, I much prefer it over writing tests manually, but you have to be very careful.
I'd hope people are. It's painfully obvious this entire AI push is rent-seeking half hidden by big tech money. At some point the free money is going to go away, but the rent for every service will remain.