577 karma · joined September 8, 2013
"In summary, findings conclusively demonstrate that consumer exposures to the ten most frequently detected pesticides on EWG's “Dirty Dozen” commodity list are at negligible levels and that the EWG methodology is insufficient to allow any meaningful rankings among commodities."
And you should really be asking yourself whether circulation numbers are a good proxy for the real value that people derive from the collection. My mother used to borrow ten books at a time and barely read any of them. Building a rigorous utility-maximizing model here is impossible. Human judgement is required.
Are there independent replications that actually show the same effect? I recall an attempted replication that produced equal miscalibrations on the upper and lower ends of the distribution, suggesting that the effect was just mean regression.
It is a long way from a patentable idea to a marketable product. So what happens when the patent originator lacks the competencies or capital to produce at scale? If selling a patent was banned, both the innovator and society would be denied any benefit from the innovation.
My cousin's father-in-law served jackfruit biryani at his wedding banquet.
He actually mentions receiving a DMCA notice for his own work despite providing proof of ownership to Youtube (but misspells DMCA, thus evading your search).
I find this sort of first-person journalism interesting, but not terribly credible. It lacks perspective or insight. Not a single local is quoted.
You'd be better off subsidizing grey water systems. Or better yet, focusing on larger scale inefficiencies in agriculture. Or push for market-pricing so individuals/businesses have incentive to pursue efficiencies.