lazyier's comments

> No Post-Quantum security

I am sure that in 100 years or so when this becomes a reality, if it ever actually happens, then I'll be sure to change my password manager.

It is kinda hard to take a security guy seriously when he thinks that a as yet mystical force is something that can be usefully defended again.

"Government" is a metaphysical concept.

What people call "The Government", in this case, is the Municipal Corporation of Boston.

This corporation profits from a monopoly control over many aspects of people's lives and special legal privileges within its geographical boundaries.

Like any other human organization it's true "purpose" and "motivation" is the collective desires of the people that run and make up that organization. Which is, mostly, going to be:

Financing the life styles and political ambitions of the people running it. That is how it works once you strip away all the flowery language and idealism.

People get involved in city government because it benefits them. It may be a stepping stone in a career in bigger government. Maybe they are looking for stable income, cheap benefits, and solid pension. Or cushy job they can't get fired from. Or its social status; they enjoy having power over people's lives, they enjoy having their opinions matter and being perceived as a person of importance.

Lots of different motivations. The corporation's motivations are their motivations. Its purpose is their purpose.

> As a result we now have a commission for bureaucracy reduction which manages several operating bodies for bureaucracy reduction, all with their own processes and guidelines.

The first order of business for any bureaucracy is to ensure its own survival.

Nobody wants to eliminate their own well being. Everybody wants security in their job. And everybody wants more money and a promotion, for the most part.

With large very stable organizations like government corporations anybody that wants to make more money (ie: get a promotion) will usually have to wait for the guy above them to retire or quit, which can take years. Sometimes education can open doors, but mostly it's going to be people leaving the organization that have been there longer then you have. Things like seniority ensure there is very little opportunity for growth.

The main opportunity for growth for a government bureaucrat is laterally... Meaning new agencies or bureaucracies need to be created that they can move into and have seniority there.

So once a bureaucracy has secured its own survival the second order of business is to grow new bureaucracies.

Which is exactly the pattern we see in all governments.

Visualizations inline in text documents have been a staple of any written media, since... the beginning?

The price is set by the market, not by the manufacturer.

This means that they won't really know the price until they find somebody willing to buy it. Before that it is just guesswork. If it costs more to produce then people are willing to spend then it won't last very long.

Which means "First commercially viable" part of the title is a bit of marketing propaganda wank. It might be or might not be commercially viable. This isn't something that gets to be decided by the manufacturer.

Being boring is one of Golang's strongest suits. There just isn't a whole lot you need to learn compared to most languages.

So does any other GUI program....

He was looking for a cross-platform GUI toolkit.

The cross-platform GUI is WWW.

That isn't a timelapse photo. It's a picture of actual lightening. It is something that actually lasts for a long time.

It must of been nuts to the people under it. Just continuous thunder for an extended period of time.

> Personally I'd like to get back to a world where the fate of civilization is not the responsibility of every individual to worry about on a daily basis.

It always has been every individual's responsibility.

What is different now is the loss of individual agency. People no longer believe that they can make a difference individually, nor do they believe that individuals can be actually be responsible for their actions.

Instead we are taught we are part of a system and that system determines outcomes we face in our lives. That we are not individuals, but belong to a group that defines how we think and how we act and it is not something we can escape from.

And what happens is that the only people in a position to do anything about solving any of our world's problems is the ones in central state government. That it is up to the government to free us or solve world hunger or save the environment or whatever else we think is the problem with society.

And the result of this is the loss of individual agency. We don't feel in control nor do we feel that we can make a difference. Instead we feel as if we are dependent on an external locus of control; politics.

So this compels people to obsess about politics. The only control we have over government is vote, but our individual vote doesn't matter. So to make a difference we need to "game" the system, forced to create narratives and convincing arguments and debates and stories to convince everybody else to agree with us.

However this 'external locus of control' we place in government is illusionary.

The government can't solve poverty, it can't fix the environment, it can't provide universal health care. All they can do is seize the wealth generated by the public and repurpose it to try to address those problems while causing a whole raft of other problems along the way.

The truth of the matter is that society is not defined by government. It doesn't work because of government and it never did.

Instead society is constructed through the individual relationships and voluntary associations people have with one another. The places you work, the churches people go to, the stores you shop at. Your friends, associates, and neighbors and, in turn the relationships those people have with everybody else. with everybody else. These casual and formal groupings and links that individuals create between them are the fabric in which society is constructed.

It is also the place where problems get solved. It is from this social fabric we get grocery stores, truck drivers, policemen, hospitals, plumbers, construction workers, and every other type of person, profession and jobs that goes into creating the resources on which human life depends.

So your personal responsibility for actually "doing something" and "changing the world for a better place" resides in your relationships with those people. How well you do your job. How well you take care of your family. How often you are willing to help out other people. The volunteer jobs you take. The financial aid you provide for other people and other initiatives.

You can tell you are doing a good job when you profit and other people profit from your existence among them.

Arguing on twitter and "taking up causes" online accomplishes nothing. It is not the signaling, or arguing, or showing solidarity or icon changing that provides any meaning. It is in the doing. It is the same now as it was 200 years ago.

I don't think that Linux can be "realtime enough" for safety-critical functions.

But I expect that it can work just fine for interacting with those systems and monitoring, configuring, and logging them and communicating state between them.

Sort of like how you will pull your hand away from a hot stove before you become aware that you are burning it. But then once I am aware of it I can take further steps to deal with the damage.. like turning off the stove, treating the hand, etc.

Long term these things can loose 100% of their value.

That is an actual possibility.

People, like the WEF, who spend a great deal of time trying to anticipate the future "revolutions" and post-"revolutions" are just a bunch of self-important assholes.

The point about the economy and "revolutions" and other things is that it's an extremely complex chaotic system. Exponentially more complex than anything any computer can model. And details matter. Details matter very very much. A accidental conversation in a hallway or a pebble rolling across a road can lead to world shattering revelations and new technology that will forever after change humanity's trajectory.

This means you cannot predict the future anymore than you can recreate an ice cube from a puddle it makes after it melted.

The required information is simply not available.

It is hard to take unverifiable claims seriously when the verifiable ones turn out to be false.

Your metabolism goes UP under fasting. Not down.

And everybody is different.

2500 is average male adult. That does not mean that he, or anybody else, actually uses 2500 calories per day.

Typically people can burn up to around 39 calories per kilogram of weight. Which means the bigger you are the more you burn.

90kg man, with an active lifestyle, would could need around 3900 calories to just maintain his body weight.

If he was a very large person who is overweight then 150 kg is not going to be very abnormal. I know plenty of guys that weigh like that don't look like fat blobs. They are just really big. Big frames, very tall, etc.

In that case then needing to consume 5500-6000 calories to maintain weight is not unreasonable. It is high, but not outside the expected range.

The problem with CICO is that it ignores the roles that hormones play in calorie consumption and fat burning.

By ignoring this CICO concept is not only oversimplifies what is happening in your body, but it is extremely misleading.

When you consume foods you get an insulin response. Insulin response is part of an elaborate chain of reactions that controls how your body regulates the usage of glucose and storage of fat.

Basically:

Your body will metabolize carbohydrates and fructose/sucrose sugars immediately into glucose. It will try to use this glucose as much as possible for fuel for your cells.

However too much glucose can be dangerous. So once your glucose levels in your bloodstream reach a certain level it will trigger your liver to start storing glucose in the liver.

Once the liver is near capacity then it will trigger the glucose to be turned into stored fat.

During that entire process YOU CANNOT BURN STORED FAT.

THAT is the part that CICO ignores.

One of the things that insulin does, along with associated processes and hormones, is inhibit the usage of stored fat for energy. The goal is to regulate glucose in the blood stream and store excess glucose as fat. That can't work if your body is busy consuming fat as energy.

SOo...

If you eat in a continuous manner and keep your insulin levels high then it makes it physically impossible for your body to "burn fat".

In order to lose weight using CICO you need to use up all the calories you consumed, wait long enough for the effects of insulin to wear off, and then start burning through your fat reserves.

It seems like this transition period takes times.

This is what bicyclists often see during races and such things. They load up on carbohydrates for the high energy they provide, but when glucose levels get low they "Bonk Out". That is they lose significant energy.

Where as if your glucose levels were never high to begin with then that can avoid that phenomena.

------------

One of the major problems with Americans diet is the high concentrated of sugars and complete lack of fiber.

When people consume natural fruits and vegetables high in carbs and sugars then that is mixed in with a lot of fibers. Long chain carbohydrates locked together and difficult to digest.

Which means that in order to get all the sugars out of the mass of the food it needs to be carried into intestines and broken down with the assistance of your gut biome.

Which means that high carb/high sugar foods in their natural state do not release all their calories instantly. It take several hours of digestion to extract everything.

Where as modern diets are full of extremely concentrated forms of carbs and sugars and no vegetable mass to go with it. Corn syrup drinks, concentrated juices, pasta, bread, candy, chips, etc.

These high energy foods are cheap to produce and provide a lot of "filler" in foods and are easily stored and consumed for snaking.

So as a result this style of diet produces the glucose spikes and the resulting "bonking out". Which is experienced by people as periods of acute tiredness, inability to concentrate, and lack of energy.

The easiest way to solve this is by having a quick high carb snack, which then restores the energy levels.

Which means that Americans, in order to maintain glucose levels, tend to eat 8 or 9 or 10 times a day (including snacks).

This not only promotes high calorie intake it also destroys the ability to consume stored fat as energy AND probably contributes heavily to problems like insulin insensitivity.

----------------

This is were one of the major misconceptions of fasting comes from:

During WW2 the USA observed the effects of famine among Europeans. To examine the effect of starvation diets on people the USA Military ran a number of controlled experiments involving volunteer service men.

Some of the effects observed involved intense prolonged hunger, lethargy, etc. Lots of bad effects and negative impacts to organs, various nutritional deficiencies, among other things.

It was then assumed that fasting would result in the same effects as extended starvation diets. And as been treated that way by the medical community for decades.

The trouble is that starvation diets involve regular meals, just very very limited ones. Where as fasting is no food at all.

The way the body reacts to fasting is different.

Why this is happens is theorized to be a survival technique.

Imagine you are a hunter gatherer. It takes significant physical effort to gather food.

If when you cease to eat your body sort of "hunkers down" down to conserve energy then it would potentially lead to a sort of death spiral were less and less food means less and less energy and, thus, less and less ability to get more food. You gradually become weaker and slower as time goes on.

Where what typically happens is after an extended period of not eating your hunger ceases and your energy increases. The idea being that the increase in energy allows to you work harder to hunt/harvest foods.

This is probably why it is becoming more popular for athletes to combine exercise and fasting.

-----------

And all of this, I think, heavily relates to why things like intermittent fasting, paleo diets, and keto diets are popular.

Now I don't believe that a diet of mostly steak and butter is particularly healthy, but I also don't think that a diet of cheap high-carb fiber-free "factory foods" is particularly healthy either.

I think it's likely that a high carb diet combined with moderate fats and proteins can probably be very healthy, provided those carbs come in a more "natural" format combined with significant amount of fiber.

> Have anybody tried Spacemacs?

Yes.

Spacemacs is awesome. It was what allowed me to switch 100% to using Emacs.

The amount of time necessary to devote to being proficient in Emacs is significant. When you have to figure out how to re-wire Emacs and all the various extensions you want to use to use Evil (with consistent bindings) is even more.

Spacemacs allowed me to benefit from the work that others have done in these regards significantly.

However I recently switch over to Doom-Emacs. Which is very much like Spacemacs, but faster and easier to customize.

I strongly recommend that people trying out Emacs that do NOT want to give up Vi/Vim/NeoVim bindings to check out Doom-Emacs. It is the shit. It is very very good. Not nearly as quick as NeoVim, but it's worlds better then it used to be. And pretty attractive as far as text-oriented applications go.

Native Comp + Doom-Emacs + Native Wayland GTK + Nerd Fonts = Best damn operating system ever invented. So far. And it comes with a really good editor, too.

Evil Emacs is a better Vi them Vim IMO.

Although NeoVim is pretty special.

> That's the reality. Why does the US/California make it seem like recycling is a magic trick to save the planet?

Because propaganda has more impact than the truth.

It is fan fiction about how Elon should leverage twitter branded cryptocurrency to gain enough political support to fight off any attempt by the establishment to take out twitter.

The basic idea is that if he can give all twitter users a share via cryptocurrency they will have a financial incentive to defend Twitter from a predicted political onslaught.

Pretty much everything you hear about "solving" the food supply is going to be lies and misinformation.

The people that know what they are talking about are already in the industry. You are not going to see their opinions because they are busy doing what they can.

The people who actually understand things not politicians, academics, or columnists.