slededit

“Wholesome” is not a scientific term.

The food landscape is filled with pseudoscience, and whether a compound is synthesized or extracted is more of an economic decision not a scientific one.

What specifically are you looking for? That synthetic foods exist? Google provides many results on the subject. You probably have already eaten some synthetic ingredients.

For a real world example sugar was first synthesized in 1953 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucrose#Chemical_synthesis

Carbohydrate synthesis is also a well studied field. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate_synthesis

Many vitamin additives today are artifical. And of course artificial flavoring has vast commercial adoption. In the case of McDonald's french fries this was used to dramatically reduce the amount of saturated fat while maintaining the beef flavor - they are no longer deep fried in beef talow.

We can't yet recreate the texture of a pepper, but we can certainly create a synthetic smoothie with the necessities of life. Organic chemistry is a rich field of study.

FYI it looks like you've been shadow banned since your first posts in the thread "A female engineer's opinion on why there are fewer...".

Your posts since then have been substantive so I vouched for this one. You should contact the mods and ask them to reconsider the ban. It looks like others have vouched specific comments multiple times in the past and the mods are pretty reasonable.

> There have been many, perhaps endless attempts to synthesize a wholesome food product - it would be worth a fortune. I am aware of zero successes to date and this shouldn't be the case if its not very difficult. We don't even synthesize sugar for consumption - maybe start there, but it is not even clear if/how much it causes diabetes or other diseases.

There are lots of synthetic foods. The main problem is marketing. How are you going to sell your lab food when "processed" is bad and "natural" is good? The organic movement has taught people to distrust science in food, and its not something that is going to easily be reversed. The fact that most synthetic advances are used for cost reduction - not health doesn't help here either.

The only place where this has seen any adoption is synthetic meats. But I expect vegetable replacements to be many decades off - if ever.

In most cases the cat would probably come back after it had its fun outdoors. "Outdoor" cats do this every day. The main reason is its potential to be killed by wildlife, traffic, or consideration of its effects on local bird populations.

I do sympathize with you about cats that never get to go outside. Leashes are probably a reasonable compromise.

The Ford family has 40% voting rights regardless of how many common shares are sold. No buyer would ever accept that - and the family would never give up their preferred shares.

Your scenario may happen with another car company, but not Ford. They would have to go bankrupt first.

I wonder why they needed the laser pre-heater. I can't imagine it is that dramatically more effective than resistive heating. Even if it is, just having a longer pre-heater to make up for it would have to be cheaper.

EDIT: Did a bit of research, a major benefit of laser heating is direct control of energy transfer so you can be sure your heating the plastic to the right temperature regardless of how fast its moving through the heater. Still, aren't all these advantages eliminated by the traditional primary heater immediately after?

From what I read in Matt Levine's bloomberg column - not really. Bankers make money by being middle men, not predicting the market.

Its an interesting concept. Addition or subtraction now would have to dynamically return either a zero type or a non-zero type. I suppose the type system could force you to check and handle the zero case.

In reality I think it would be too cumbersome. Division by zero is a relatively rare flaw and zero agnostic math on integers is common. I'd love to hear about any languages that do this.

I’ve noticed this too. I’ve never clicked any of them yet they keep getting recommended.

My other favorite example is Netflix and WWII docs/movies. Watch just one and forever onward they will be half your recommendations.

Their recruiters used it to show how cool they were - so I don’t think so.

The wikipedia pages on both fail to explain why there were never built. I assume it was difficulty of manufacture but in the case of the additron it seemed close enough to existing technology that it could have been mastered fairly quickly.

Its been a while since I've gotten into the theory here. But ultimately an object is a set of data and mutators upon that data.

The Unix model does not link the two together - where for most hardware the two are inseparable. A sound card can only work on certain formats of data - it is more than mere bytes. It may have only limited processing ability (e.g. an EQ functionality or FM synthesizer). Ioctls are a hack around this - and of course they do "work" but they are not clean. They are also clearly not congruent with the Unix philosophy, you can't cleanly chain and pipe them or compose them into a larger whole.

NT did much better on this front, but much of the beauty is hidden by the horrid win32 layered on top. Cocoa is much nicer and probably the best real world example of how nice it can be when done right. You can use the UNIX APIs on a mac, but why would you want to?

I disagree with the premise that everything is bytes - Harvard architecture computers more cleanly separate nouns (the data) from verbs (the instructions). There is no fundamental requirement the two be mixed although it is done for convenience. With fixed function hardware there is no binary code to execute at all.

Objects - which make verbs first class citizens more cleanly represent the true state of affairs and cover a much broader variety of cases more cleanly.

I'm more with Dave Cutler and think Unix's win was a sad historical accident. It worked great in a world with teletypes but is a horrible model for our world of multimedia.

Ioctls are a sad blemish on the face of computing and fork() while again beautiful in the simple world of single threaded programs forces far too many constraints on modern OS services. Modern OSs get around it by barely supporting it except for exec() calls immediately after.

Simply put... not everything is a byte.

They are world renowned for their intrusive audits/shakedowns - and that's just with their database products. Java utilities are an order of magnitude more prevalent. That's why the main cost is still going to be license compliance regardless of what they charge upfront.

Java isn't going away but those that can migrate will. Especially after their first audit.

I think we're going to see a massive migration over to C# and .NET. Even if the prices were reasonable ($15,000 per processor?!) the overhead of license compliance is way too high.

The major apps will obviously not be re-written but all the little utilities and glue will move pretty quickly.

I remember sitting a bit up front in a theatre and thinking “I can see the pixels”. And worse it was slightly out of focuse (maybe intentionally to hide them).

From that day on every time I see a 4K film in theatres the low resolution bugs me. 8K should get us much closer to the old 35mm experience.

They are willing to take the loss because they have fleet wide emissions targets. So they will sell just enough to allow them to sell the SUVs they actually want to make - but no more.

> if you are 100s of billion, I am pretty certain you're not concerned with .0000001 dollars

Be careful with that logic. Salami fraud takes advantage of low precision. You need to maintain enough precision to make it not worthwhile for your transaction volume.

It does trip a lot of “turn off your ad blocker” nag screens.

They should have went with Water Bears. It can survive even in space. Plus they sound cute (but look scary).

With the advent of regulatory law the legal codes are no longer the full story. It’s quite possible they are decisions of a regulatory body which will not show up in statute.

CockroachDB at least refers to their marketing line of "almost impossible to kill/take down" and the way it scales to many servers. There are few less gross insects they could have used though like Bees or Ants.

If there was a national scandal in the UK I can almost guarantee the coke CEO would be out placating politicians. Lip service is important in politics as is keeping up appearances.

We all knew that the UK didn’t have much real power over these US multinationals, but Zuckerberg made it visible. A government looking weak In the face of a single 36 year old is a sovereignty issue. It’s a huge loss of credibility at home and abroad. It has shockingly little to do with the underlying issue.

These nations feel their sovereignty is threatened by Facebook. Him ignoring them isn’t exactly helping, nor is the fact that he did submit to Congress which does the same pointless lecturing.

These nations are all losing face from being snubbed. They are going to take increasingly drastic measures to assert their authority - this is not something that will go away. You already saw this with the UK parliament seizing documents which is unprecedented in recent times.

And yet such a feature would more or less solve the problem for a large majority of users. What you describe as terrible seems like a pretty good feature to me. If a URL is visually indistinguishable from amazon.com yet differs at the byte level its probably not legit.

If I were implementing it I would render the domain text and then check how significantly pixels differed from its nearest "known" domain. We used to do this with render tests where there was a bit of noise.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

ANSI C looks pretty different to K&R C, especially in the function declaration syntax. The only difference is Fortran had its facelift just a little later.

We’re sort of in that world with the Mac mini. Except instead of overheating we just get laptop performance in a desktop.

It still has a fan though.

This happens in reverse too. Teachers assume high achieving students will continue to achieve and give them more slack.

The trick to all my "writing" classes was to simply put the most effort in the first assignment. It was pretty clear that future marks were a function of prior marks, and I tested this hypothesis in different classes by modulating my effort on various assignments throughout the year.