It wouldn’t be a 30% higher electrical bill overall. It would be 30% more for whatever power you’re using for this specific device, which, if it’s ordinarily 10W while in sleep and an average 100W while in use, and you use it 50 hours per week, or 215 hours per month, that’s a baseline power usage of 21500 watt hours in use and 5050 watt hours from idle/sleep/suspend. Or a total of 26550 watt hours, or 26.5 kWh. At 20 cents per kWh, you’re talking about $5.30 per month in electricity for the computer. A 30% increase would be an extra $1.60 per month.

That wasn’t the real Tesla, though. It was actually the Goblin King.

Depends on sunlight, and the color of the pavement. For dark asphalt, simply preventing a dusting of white snow goes a long way at converting the sunlight into heat, basically for free.

That albedo effect is a big part of the reason why it’s so important to try to save as much snow/glacier/icecap now as possible at the poles. It’s a cascading effect where a little bit of melting early on ends up making a huge difference in how much melting happens overall.

Dude don’t you have a department of health and human services to run?

why a train journey from San Francisco to Los Angeles has to be 12 hours long

That’s its own saga, with a bunch of factors specific to California politics (and national politics with funding and permitting California projects). The California High Speed Rail project intends to connect SF to LA in less than 3 hours (and the original 2008 plan aimed for a 2020 operational start date), but we’ll see if that ever comes to fruition.

Also, I guess you guys do not regularly travel from New York to Los Angeles for a weekend trip, just as we Europeans don’t usually do that with Stockholm and Barcelona (which is a distance the average European would also travel by plane).

One wrinkle in comparing things is that the US’s cultural affinity is less tied to geographical proximity than in Europe. Obviously European villages and cities and major population centers were established long before rail, much less before automobile highways and commercial air travel (or even before global television broadcasts), so each local region will have its own culture and language.

In the U.S., with the population centers built up much more recently, cultural affinity between cities or regions is distinct from geographical proximity. So for many, a weekend getaway or a one-week vacation will tend to look to other similarly sized cities. One joke in the TV show 30 Rock was the idea that someone from New York would want to move to, or even visit, Cleveland. This is especially true for those who aren’t straight white Christians, where much of the geographical footprint of the United States represents urban islands where you might feel like you belong, and where you’d want to hop from island to island rather than explore the vast areas geographically nearby.

Human life absolutely factors into predicted lawsuit losses. Wrongful death lawsuits are expensive.

You’re right about all that, but it’s worth noting that U.S. population centers tend to be coastal. New York to Chicago is one of the closer city pairs between the 10 largest cities in the U.S. Here’s the driving distance from New York to each of the other 9:

Los Angeles: 2800 miles (4500 km)
Chicago: 800 miles (1300 km)
Dallas: 1600 miles (2500 km)
Houston: 1600 miles (2600 km)
Miami: 1300 miles (2100 km)
Washington: 230 miles (370 km)
Atlanta: 900 miles (1400 km)
Philadelphia: 100 miles (160 km)
Phoenix: 2400 miles (3900 km)

Dallas and Houston are close to each other. New York, Philadelphia, and DC are close (and are already connected by the most popular passenger rail line in the US). But the others are all pretty spread out.

So the type of travel people might imagjne doing in the U.S. tends to be weighted towards pretty far distances.

The result is insane in my opinion, it means any sensible math system with basic arithmetic has a proposition that you cannot prove.

Stated more precisely, it has true propositions that you cannot prove to be true. Obviously it has false propositions that can’t be proven, too, but that’s not interesting.

with a rigorous, needlessly convoluted proof.

Again, Goedel’s theorem was in direct response to Russell and Whitehead spending literally decades trying to axiomize mathematics. Russell’s proof that 1+1=2 was 300 pages long. It was non-trivial to disprove the idea that with enough formality and rigor all of mathematics could be defined and proven. Instead of the back and forth that had already taken place (Russell proposes an axiomatic system, critics show an error or incompleteness in it, Russell comes back and adds some more painstaking formality, critics come back and do it again), Goedel came along and smashed the whole thing by definitively proving that there’s nothing Russell can do to revive the major project he had been working on (which had previously hit a major setback when Russell himself proved Russell’s paradox).

how about:
x = 2
2x = 3,000
omg! they’re inconsistent!

You didn’t define x, the equals sign, the digit 2, 3, or 0, or the convention that a real constant in front of a variable implies multiplication, or define a number base we’re working in. So that statement proves nothing in itself.

And no matter how many examples of incomplete or contradictory systems you come up with, you haven’t proven that all systems are either incomplete or contradictory. No matter how many times you bring out a new white swan, you haven’t actually proven that all swans are white.

And formal logic and set theory may have seemed like masturbatory discipline with limited practical use, but it also laid the foundation for Alan Turing and what would become computer science, which indisputably turned into useful academic disciplines that changed the world.

but I feel like people in union jobs making enough of a salary to buy a comfortable home is going to drive up wages for everyone

Even if that is an effect where increased unionized non-supervisor wages push up supervisor salaries, my point is that there are simply fewer middle managers to benefit from that effect.

Plus the second order effects of a hollowed out middle choking out the pipeline for promoting and training future business leaders, so that it’s a small number of big corporate executives overseeing jobs they’ve never had instead of the older system of a lot more small and medium sized business leaders supervising jobs they used to personally work.

It was a response to philosophers who were trying to come up with a robust axiomatic system for explaining math. Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica attempted to formalize everything in math, and Goedel proved it was impossible.

So yes, it’s a bit of a circlejerk, but it was a necessary one to break up another circlejerk.

I don’t think the McAllisters were in union jobs. I think they were pretty high up the tier of management.

People talk about union jobs going away, but don’t forget, non-unionized middle management has totally been gutted by outside consultants over the same time period. So the changes in the workforce have hurt the earning power of both the line workers and the middle managers who used to make up the middle class.

Why no, I am not a vampire

Oh and you probably don’t want us driving wooden stakes through your heart either, huh?

But my French toast slaps now.

Let other people enjoy their preferences. Some people get very particular about console/IDE fonts, keyboard switches, T-shirt fabric blends, fork shape, guitar string material, etc. Others like fashion and style. Some like architecture and interior design. Let people enjoy things, and get deep in the weeds on minute differences if they want to.

This particular linked study, that is the basis for this thread, limited itself to only unprocessed red meat.

There’s three metrics to think about:

• Actual number of years reduced/increased
• Actual probability of that change in lifespan
• Statistical certainty that the trend we observe is actually linked to the variable we’re studying.

Russian roulette (traditional 1 round in 6 chambers) in a hospice ward (where everyone has been given a prognosis of less than 6 months to live) would be a very high certainty of shaving months off the life of 1/6 of the studied population. In the grand scheme of things, that’s not a very high risk. But at the same time, we can look at it and say “yes, shooting oneself with a revolver is very bad for health.” Putting a more or less deadly round in the chamber is probably not going to be a hugely significant change in outcomes, even if we can objectively say that one is better or worse for the person’s health than the other.

Almost all dietary/nutrition studies involve much smaller swings in lifespan or health conditions, probabilistically over a smaller portion of the population, with less statistical certainty in the observations. But the science is still worth doing, and analyzing, because that all adds up.

This study shows inflammatory markers are increased on a ketogenic diet: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6922028/

This rat study shows increased senescence in heart and kidneys in long term ketosis: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ado1463

However, Cholesterol is not a disease - its essential for life - the concern has never been cholesterol but atherosclerosis - if someone has elevated LDL, undamanged and unglycated (as on keto) and they are concerned they should get a CAC score so they can see their actual plaque burden.

What you’re asking for is being studied. Here’s a meta study from 2013:

However, one established risk factor of CVD, i.e. LDL-cholesterol, still turned out to be harmfully affected by the VLC regimen, most probably attributable to the larger amounts of saturated fat in the diet(Reference Bueno, de Melo and de Oliveira1). In their discussion, the authors stated that future meta-analyses should investigate the impact of low carbohydrates (LC) v. LF on other important pathological markers, e.g. endothelial function, in order to further assess the safety of LC dietary therapies.

This is reasonable, since evidence from prospective cohort studies has shown that endothelial dysfunction represents an independent risk factor for the development of many CVD including atherosclerosis(Reference Inaba, Chen and Bergmann2). We, therefore, carried out a meta-analysis to compare the effects of LC and LF regimens on flow-mediated dilatation (FMD). FMD of the brachial artery is a non-invasive measure of endothelial function, furthermore reflecting the local bioavailability of endothelium-derived vasodilators, especially NO. Inflammation of the endothelium is regarded to play a major role in the destabilisation of atherosclerotic lesions, therefore paving the way for future CVD events(Reference Inaba, Chen and Bergmann2).

Their results:

In our meta-analysis, LC dietary protocols were associated with a significant decrease in FMD when compared with their LF counterparts. A recent meta-analysis of observational studies including a sample size of 5·547 subjects has observed that a 1 % decrease in FMD is associated with a 13 % increase in the risk of future cardiovascular events(Reference Inaba, Chen and Bergmann2)

Along the same lines, here’s another study with arterial measurements that shows reduced blood flow and arterial function for those who stuck with a high protein diet: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000331970005101003

Look, none of these studies are, standing alone, enough to really change things. But it seems to me, from the outside that you’re cherry picking your own results to justify carnivore diet.

The high carb versus low carb discussion is complicated and has a lot of factors at play. But the evidence for animal versus plant based low carb suggests that animal product diets are more harmful than plant product diets of similar macronutrient profiles.

Moreover, the overall trends show that those who eat a lot of whole grains (which are, by their nature, high carb plant based foods) have lower mortality than those who don’t. The same is true of those who eat a lot of fruit (again, high carb plant based food).

Trying to tease out which of a million variables is truly responsible for cardiovascular health isn’t easy, but a lot of the overall trends can be seen:

• Whole grains good
• Whole fruit good
• Red meat bad
• Cured meat really bad
• Seafood good
• Legumes good

Now, you can quibble with confounding variables, but at a certain point trying to argue that minutiae starts looking like religious apologetics, really cherry picking examples in favor while ignoring examples against. Coming up with a coherent theory of “fiber not important” or “the foods our genetic ancestors ate are somehow bad for us now” is an uphill battle, and I’m not convinced that the carnivore diet is anything more than a scam designed to sell books.

The injections work by causing your brain to want to do the things that you’re describing. Adherence to a plan is the hard part, and the drugs tend to make people naturally want to stick with that plan, by literally making it more desirable than not sticking with it.