Fondots @ Fondots @lemmy.world

Posts

12

Comments

1,277

Joined

2 yr. ago

Its definitely an old invention, but maybe not quite as old as you might imagine, we have evidence of a good handful of things from before then

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_historic_inventions

Two things on that list in particular kind of stand out to me as obvious precursors to bread

Control of fire and cooking (2.3 million years ago) hard to bake without that unless maybe you live in a very volcanicaly active area or something where you can burry food in the ground or something to cook

Mortar and pestle (37 thousand years ago) gotta have some way of grinding grains into flour

Which leads us up to bread (14.5 thousand years ago)

I think there's a lot of nuance that both sides of this are missing. There's a lot of middle ground between not talking to women out in the world at all, and going up to random girls and saying "nice shoes, wanna fuck?

You absolutely can approach people, strike up a conversation, maybe even hit it off and spin it into a friendship or romantic relationship.

I'm far from the guy to tell someone how to do that and try to pick apart the it's and outs of what makes some things ok and others not, but it is something that absolutely can be done.

To the best of my knowledge, the most common parallel universe theory that has any actual real traction in physics is the "many worlds interpretation"

Which is basically that any time some sort of quantum event is observed, the universe splits into multiple parallel universes where every possible outcome of that event is realized in its own universe.

Now people take that and run with it and make up all sorts of pseudoscience bullshit where those splits happen anytime someone makes a choice, or some pseudorandom event like a coin flip or die roll occurs. That's not really what it's about.

This is about wonky quantum physics, radioactive decay, collapsing wave function type stuff. I'll be honest this is high level physics shit, I only kind of understand some of it, which is more than probably 90+% of people out there can say, for most people it probably means about as much as if you came up to them and started talking to them in a foreign language.

So that means that all of those parallel universes are going to be following the same laws of physics since they all diverged from the same universe.

That means that flying reindeer and traveling around the world in a night delivering presents down chimney and such is probably a no-go.

As far as there being a universe where some weirdo named Santa Claus decided to live at the North Pole and build toys, maybe, but probably pretty unlikely. I have a pretty hard time imagining a version of the world where different quantum outcomes would lead to that. Would, for example, a single uranium atom decaying or not decaying make that happen? Probably not. Of course, untold millions of tiny events like that can eventually add up to some big difference, but I still have a hard time imagining a situation where that would be the outcome.

Like I think someone in this thread already said, there are an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1 (0.1, 0.2, 0.001234, etc,) but none of them are "2" some things are just impossible.

I just built a PC after not having a computer for about 5+ years.

Built it for games, did not feel like I was missing out on anything in particular except games by not having a computer. There's a lot of things I'd rather use a computer for but these days most of what I used to do on a computer can be done just fine from a phone or tablet.

During those 5 or so years, I maybe needed to use a computer about a dozen times, and if my wife didn't have a computer I could have just swung by a library for a bit to take care of it.

A little over a decade ago I was a pizza dude. I remember getting off work at about 11pm and craving pretty much anything but pizza, so every so often I'd stop through McDonald's on my way home since they were pretty much the only place open, fork over about 5 bucks from my night's tips, and get a couple McChicken and/or mcdoubles, fries, and a drink, and get change back.

That same order now costs over $10.

I think I remember back then that I averaged out to a bit over $10/hour after figuring in tips. I'm no longer a pizza dude and I'm making a bit over $30, so I've beaten the McDonald's inflation rate by a bit and can afford to spring for it if I find myself really craving it, but everything else has also gotten more expensive and $10 isn't as easy to justify for some junk food.

But your average pizza dude today probably hasn't beaten that rate. They're tipped employees so all the bullshit that comes with that means they're probably still only making around $10/hour. I think there's been a bit of a delivery boom since then so maybe they're doing a little better than that but I doubt many are making the over $20/hour they'd need to be able to afford a late night McDonald's snack with the same ease I used to be able to.

Also, at least around me, they're not even open late anymore since COVID. I still work a weird night shift so that's something else I'm up against. My only options when I get off work if I want a snack is gas station/convenience store food.

I used to be the shipping/receiving guy in a warehouse, it fell to me to arrange all of our freight pickups, which was annoying because I didn't really have direct access to any information about pricing, deadlines, etc. so I was constantly going back to the office to show someone quotes to see whether the rates and transit times were acceptable.

Most of our freight was LTL stuff (less than truckload, a couple pallets, not enough to fill a truck by itself) but a few times every month or two we'd get full truckload sized orders.

When it came to them, often "intermodal" shipping had much better rates. Intermodal meaning at least 2 different forms of transportation were going to be used. Truck, train, boat, cargo plane, etc.

As a US-based company with mostly US-based customers, that usually meant rail for us.

However, almost none of our shipments went intermodal because it was too slow for our customers.

It wasn't usually a drastic difference, we're talking maybe 1-3 extra days in most cases. Over the Road (OTR) there weren't many places in the US that we couldn't get freight to from our location in 5 days or less, and those 5 day locations were mostly real middle-of-nowhere customers on the other side of the country.

It always blew my mind that we didn't or couldn't push our customers to just place orders 2 or 3 days earlier to save some pretty significant money on shipping.

I don't claim to know much about the industry, i was just some kid who needed a job and ended up the shipping guy because I knew how to use a computer and spoke English. But we a textile company that made things like work clothes (chef coats, scrubs, industrial work wear, etc) and restaurant table linens, and we sold mostly to bigger wholesalers, business service companies, etc. who would resell it or provide it to their customers as part some sort of contracted laundry service or something, so not really something I'd think of as being particularly time-sensitive or wildly unpredictable that they couldn't anticipate their bigger orders a couple days ahead of time

Guess it probably says something about how much we all love instant gratification.

I remember my 4th grade teacher having one of these and showing it off around 2000, it may have been the first digital camera I ever saw.

Blew my mind back then.

He was one of my favorite teachers, really into science, loved gadgets. He was an older guy who retired a few years later and I heard he wasn't in the best of health, no idea if he's still around, but I hope he at least lived long enough to appreciate how far digital cameras have come since then.

You mean if he said something like "Take the guns first, go through due process second"

Because he said that and they voted for him anyway.

It's amazing how often that's the solution.

Once upon a time well before I was born my dad was a pipefitter, he still had most of his tools and so growing up we were sort of the first-line troubleshooters for everyone in my family when they had a plumbing issue. He had a pretty impressive collection of absurdly-large screwdrivers that you'd look at and go "when the hell would you ever need this?"

Until you came across a giant screw like this, or you had the tank off a toilet and needed a 2ft long screwdriver to reach the tank bolts properly.

Something about Chabad-Lubavitch and Brooklyn rang some bells for me, which isn't normally the kind of thing that would catch my attention, so I figured I must have seen something particularly weird about them in the news in the not-too-distant past.

And only one weird story from New York about Orthodox Jews comes to mind for me personally, and sure enough it was Chabad-Lubavitch that was involved in the Synagogue tunnel incident

Not that I think there's any direct correlation between these two incidents, I'm mostly just bringing it up for anyone else who had the same "why does that name ring a bell" feeling.

For me, a lot of it has to do with how it's presented in schools

Pi, for example. One day my teachers just kind of dumped this magical 3.14... number on me without any real explanation. Just basically "use this number to do stuff with circles," no real explanation on what pi actually is on anything, just "remember this"

Years later I found a gif of a circle sort of unraveling that showed how the circumference is π × the diameter of the circle

And sure, mathematically, the formula tells you that, but actually seeing that animated out made a hell of a lot more sense to me.

Now I got most of my basic math education before those gifs were so readily available, and smart boards were just becoming a thing when I was in high school, so it would have been a little hard to show that to a bunch of elementary or middle school students without having us huddle around a desktop.

But that's something that could have been illustrated pretty well with a couple circles of different sizes (cardboard cut-outs, printed on paper, different jar lids, etc,) a piece of string, and a ruler.

And the same goes for a whole lot of different math things.

In the interest of battery life and redundancy, I think it might make sense to have 3 devices.

Ereader with an e ink display for reading, a lot of these can last days or weeks on a charge easily

An mp3 player for music. I don't know what the current state of mp3 players is, I suspect a lot of no-name imported garbage, but over a decade ago I know my iPod used to go days or weeks on a charge with pretty heavy usage. Probably look for whatever has the least bells and whistles you can find- no touch screen, physical controls, etc. if you're up for a bit of tinkering I'm pretty sure there's a pretty active scene for people modding old iPods with better batteries, more storage, etc. that would probably be a great option.

A tablet or smartphone for movies, or possibly a laptop (I'm not an apple guy, but I've heard MacBooks have pretty insane battery life these days.) Keep all the wifi/cellular/Bluetooth/gps, etc. turned off, keep it on power save mode, disable anything you can that you don't need to watch movies. Unfortunately if such a thing as a dedicated video-only tablet exists, I couldn't find it with a quick search. If such a thing can be found, I'd probably recommend that.

A dedicated device that does one job well will usually be more efficient at that thing than a multipurpose device like a tablet, smartphone, or computer that needs to be able to do it all. An mp3 player only needs to be able to play music, it doesn't need to be running a full-on OS that's capable of sending emails, making phone calls, playing games, etc.

Also that way if one of those things does die on you, you still have the other 2.

I saw in one of your other comments your concern about a tablet having a bigger screen would be a bigger drain on battery life. That's true to an extent, bigger screens draw more power, but since the whole device is bigger they can compensate with a bigger battery. I haven't exactly done an exhaustive survey of tablet battery life and don't care to look into it, but in my (fairly limited) experience, they usually pretty much at least break even or surpass phones in battery life. I have a cheap tablet that I really only use for reading it lives in my bag, usually in my car, often forgotten about for days or occasionally weeks at a time, and doesn't exactly get heavy usage, but it usually can go at least a few days without a change, even with WiFi and Bluetooth left on. If I'm not using it at all, it can sometimes go a couple weeks just sitting idle. It's usually good for at least a couple hours of streaming HD video, with WiFi turned off and 720p video on internal storage I imagine it's good for at least a couple movies.

WiFi and cellular data are pretty big power drains too. I know when I check my battery usage on my phone that probably accounts for about ⅓ or so of it. Having those turned off can go a long way. Jailbreaking/rooting your phone to disable unnecessary services probably wouldn't hurt, but that's probably a drop in the bucket compared to just keeping your device offline.

Honduras? No, of course not, that would be ridiculous.

She's in CECOT now.

/S, hopefully

When they try to leave they just tend to not get very far because they never learned how to pump their own gas.

Just as an FYI, aerodynamics can be a little complicated, it depends on the exact vehicle, the speeds you're going, etc. but there's a lot of cases where a tonneau cover will actually hurt your mpg.

Price is definitely the thing holding me back from a new vehicle as well, even though the maverick is one of the more affordable trucks out there it's still too rich for my blood. I have a friend who just got one though, so I plan on using him as a guinea pig for the next few years until a new car is hopefully in my budget.

It does only have the bumper, I've never looked into it because we've never needed to tow anything. We have the long bed so anything we've ever needed to haul fit in there just fine.

I love that truck. It has yet to hit 100k miles because until the last couple years my parents had 3 vehicles and especially now that they're retired they never really go anywhere anyway.

And for a 32 year old truck, it still gets pretty decent gas mileage, pretty damn close to 20mpg, the new rangers don't beat that by much.

It's not without its downsides, it's rwd so it's kind of shitty on anything but dry pavement unless you have some weight in the bed, and it's 0-60 time is probably best stated as "eventually," but it's done everything I've ever needed a truck to do.

If Ford came out with basically that exact truck with a modern engine to get better gas mileage but otherwise kept the performance the same, it would probably be my next vehicle. Wouldn't mind AWD/4wd too but I could live without.

I really like the maverick but the small bed is kind of a deal breaker. I've heard some rumors that they may add a midgate in a couple years to open the bed up into the back seat so if they do that I'm probably sold.

Yeah, for towing that's basically useless unless you're only using it to tow around a wood splitter or something.

That said, my family has had a 1993 Ford ranger for many years. I'm pretty sure even with the 4-cylinder engine it still has a towing capacity several times that much, but we have never towed anything with it. We have gotten a lot of use out of it as a truck though, moving furniture, camping gear, small loads of firewood, trips to the hardware store, etc.

I can also potentially see this being big for certain fleet vehicles. Growing my dad worked on a military base as a civilian in their wastewater treatment plant. Part of his job involved driving around the base once a day or so to take water samples from a couple places. The public works department had a couple small trucks, Chevy S10 I think, that he'd use for that. They got used by other public works employees, never for anything particularly heavy duty but they did occasionally tote around some bulky tools, equipment, materials, but a significant amount of what they used them for could probably have used a golf cart. I'd be amazed if those trucks went 10 miles most days, they sat most of the time, kind of a perfect sort of situation for them to sit on a charger.

I don't really like brand favouritism, but if you're able to find a Toyota in your price range, as far as I'm concerned it's pretty hard to go wrong with them. I'm pretty hard-pressed to think of anyone I've ever known who's had a Toyota who had anything really bad to say about them, even with the few years of Tacomas that had major rust issues around the early 2000s, everyone I know who had one felt that Toyota did a pretty solid job of doing right by them.

My current car is an '07 4runner. I bought it used with around 150k miles on it about 5 years ago, I now at just over 200k miles. and except for the usual shit like brakes that are expected to wear down every few years, the only major thing I've had to deal with was replacing the alternator. It does have a small exhaust leak that throws a code for the catalytic converter every so often (it's on for maybe a couple weeks every few months or so) that I'm not particularly concerned about. I'm fairly confident that with not much beyond regular upkeep this car could make it to 300k+ pretty easily.

My wife is driving a Prius that's a few years newer (2012 I think) she's had it for a few years now, only thing she's needed is new tires so far.

Growing up my mom had an '89 Corolla, and there's a damn good chance it's still on the road. At some point we sold it to my uncle who later sold it to a cousin, and after that we lost track of it, but around that time (circa 2010-ish) it was still going just fine, even after having a pretty large tree fall on it and all of the usual wear and tear you'd expect on a 20+ year old car.

Outside of my family's favoritism for Toyotas, I also have a hard time thinking of people who have anything bad to say about Honda's. I've also never heard anyone complain about their Subaru, I have less personal experience with Subarus overall, I've never driven one, but my overall impression of every one I've ever ridden in has been positive, and Subaru owners sing their praises.

Most people I've known with Kias and Hyundais have also spoken highly about them..

Overall, my general advice is buy from any of the major Asian car brands unless you need a larger pickup truck (¾ ton or bigger,) then pretty much your only options are pretty much American trucks. For ½ ton or smaller trucks, I'd personally stick to Asian brands still, with the possible exception of the Ford Maverick.

As far as specific models, my personal recommendations are

Subaru in pretty much any market segment they inhabit. Smaller sporty cars are dumb regardless of brand, but if that's your thing, go Subaru.

Sedans/hatchbacks- Toyota Corolla or Prius, Honda Accord or civic.

Compact suvs/crossovers- Toyota RAV4, Honda CRV, Kia sportage, Hyundai Tucson. Wrangler if you actually intend to go off roading, Suzuki samurai if you're going off roading and not in the US.

Mid-sized SUV: Toyota 4runner (I've dialed in that a midsized SUV is the right sized car for me personally at this point in my life, not going to go into all of the reasoning for that, but having driven a few different brands and models I am personally confident in saying that it is the be-all end-all of mid sized SUVs for me, if Isuzu ever makes a comeback in the passenger vehicle segment and resurrects the trooper I may be open to reevaluating that because I loved my trooper, but they're all 20+ years old now)

Full-sized SUVs: do not recommend. If you can find one of the old school jeep wagoneers maybe do that for the cool factor, but if you're contemplating a full sized SUV what you really want is a minivan, or maybe a Ford flex. They're not "cool," but trust me, minivans are the shit.

Minivans- they're all pretty good, never met a minivan I didn't like.

Small pick-up trucks- Ford Maverick, or if you need/want a "real" truck get a Tacoma or Frontier, or go for old rangers/Mazda B series or a t100 if you're ok with an old truck, or replace all of those recommendations with a Toyota Hilux if you're not in the US/Canada

½ ton pickup- Toyota tundra

Bigger than ½ ton- you don't need this unless you are regularly towing a heavy trailer or live and work on a farm, or do major construction business with your personal vehicle, or something to that effect. If that applies to you, take your pick of any of the big 3 American brands, I like Fords, but honestly I view this as the same as picking your favorite color, it's what you like personally, don't let anyone else yuck your yum.

Personally, and I'm not saying this applies to everyone by a longshot, what car you need/want is fairly personal, but if I had carte blanche to go out and buy any newish car I could find to replace my current vehicle I'd be looking at

Toyota 4runner or Tacoma Subaru Crosstrek or Outback
Ford Maverick

But I'm an outdoorsy, DIY-minded person, who goes "off-road" occasionally (I don't go off roading for its own sake, but my life sometimes tak me driving onto a beach, or down some shitty dirt paths, over fields, etc.) has to commute in the snow, often has to pick up bulky lumber and such, and occasionally how small trailers.

My wife who doesn't usually have any of those needs would probably be looking at a newer Prius, or maybe a Hyundai Kona if she decided she wanted something bigger.

And in an ideal world, I'd probably have a maverick or 4runner for my various outdoorsy and DIY pursuits, and whatever the smallest cheapest DIY hybrid or electric car I can find is for my daily commuting as long as it has 4 wheels, a/c, and a radio, pretty much anything out there would be just fine for me. But I can only count on having 2 parking spaces.

Honestly at 5k in this economy, you're probably scraping the bottom of the barrel of anything that can be considered a "good" car, and you're probably going to just end up with whatever is available near you in your price range with relatively low miles. Go asian if you can't but don't expect anything amazing to present itself.

First of all, this isn't something I support, I don't trust literally anything this administration does, and it's not really something I want my tax dollars spent on

But taking a step back, when I think about it, I'm a little surprised the pentagon doesn't already have one.

Pretty much anyone who goes on TV is getting a quick once over by the hair/makeup/wardrobe people. And it's not like they don't host press conferences and such at the pentagon with some frequency.

And the military is all about appearances - uniforms, hairstyle regulations, polished boots, etc. If you're putting some military bigwig in front of a camera, that's, in part, a propaganda opportunity, so you want them to look the part

True, I did think about mentioning that but decided to skip over it to keep things simple.

Animals like cows for example, can get by almost entirely on fiber. Stuff like grass doesn't have much in the way of carbs we can use, but it contains a ton of fiber, and cows digestive systems are set up to actually do something with them.

The extra "stomachs" they have allow for some extra fermentation and such to happen so they can break down that fiber into simpler carbs.