cynar
@cynar@lemmy.world
- Comment on Why don’t Gen Z buy rounds in the pub? 10 hours ago:
As I read it, it basically comes off as the author being grumpy that it’s harder to sponge off people who drink less, or slower.
I will do reciprocal drink buying, but hate formalising into “rounds”. My drinking rate can vary wildly. I don’t want to be forced to drink faster, to keep up with others.
Gen Z is the most financially squeezed age group in my memory. The fact they want to be more discerning in how much they drink and pay makes complete sense.
It’s also worth noting that contactless card machines also remove a major bottleneck in going to the bar.
- Comment on Labour overtakes Reform in voter poll for first time since March 2025 2 days ago:
I just get an urge for a large, sticky milkshake when I see him. I’ve no idea why…
- Comment on Labour overtakes Reform in voter poll for first time since March 2025 2 days ago:
It’s unlikely, but I’m still hoping his encounter with count binface throws him in the trash.
- Comment on thoughts and prayers for science 5 days ago:
Given the title of the blank list is “Diseases eradicated by prayer” this list gets a lot funnier.
- Comment on It's becoming widely accepted that it's not safe to put pictures of your children on social media... (cont. in post) 1 week ago:
The modern world has made it so that teenagers have nowhere to “exist” without paying. Even hanging out on the road gets the police called on them.
Many have moved to online communities. At that point the line between social media and game are quite blurry. Is a Minecraft server a game, or a way of having fun with your friends?
As someone who “found my tribe” online, long before I found them in real life, I understand where the woods are coming from. Even for adults, the modern world has become VERY socially isolating.
It’s also not just bad households. A lot of families now have 2 working parents. This leaves very little time for arranging playdates, or giving lifts to friends. Kids supplement their lost social time with online time. Some end up in toxic communities, but most flow through it with years of experience at this point.
I watched a talk on internet safety for children (as a parent/guardian). One of the biggest bits of advice was to stay involved. Play the games they love, even if they bore you. Let them talk about their online friendship groups. You can then help guide them towards good choices, rather than deal with the fallout from bad ones compounding.
- Comment on Why in America is .08 the legal limit for drunk driving? How come it's not an even 0.10? Who decided at what level being drunk starts? Then 4 beers of 12oz's is 0.08 why is it that small? 2 weeks ago:
2 reasons, remembered from a lawyers lecture on the subject at uni, years ago, in the UK.
-
Some people produce small amounts of alcohol in their gut. It’s generally not much (more becomes auto brewery syndrome) but not zero. This can blip the test up slightly, even when they haven’t drunk.
-
The awkward fact that a small amount of alcohol actually improves driving. It’s somewhere between 1/4 and 3/4 pint of beer. It’s also the reason alcohol is considered a performance enhancing drug in some olympic sports.
The limit is set high enough that there is no arguing these points in a court. It also covers the residual alcohol in people’s systems the morning after. It’s well into the point where all but the heaviest alcoholic will definitely be impaired. That lets them use blood alcohol as a proxy for impaired driving due to alcohol.
On a side note. I know someone who blew red on the breathalyser. He knew something was wrong, since he has been teetotal for 20 years. He got arrested, only for the blood test to show 0.0. The police were quite confused, but let him go. It turned out, he had (unthinkingly) eaten a liqueur chocolate before being pulled over. It was enough to mess up the breathalyser.
-
- Comment on How does death with a mechanical/artificial heart work? 2 weeks ago:
Our mind is dependent on the exact wiring and firing potentials of the neurons. This is what stores everything (skills, memories, autonomic functions etc).
When the neurons die, this information is rapidly lost. Connections break, and triggering potentials collapse.
Reversing brain death involves reversing that process. It would almost be easier to digitise the brain and simulate it at that point.
What might be possible is localised repairs. Strokes can take out small, but critical areas of the brain. Rebuilding a speech center is a lot easier. The brain can distribute a lot of functions, if required. Putting new material in and letting it both learn to use it, and teach it to function is within the realms of medicine. It’s the difference however between a skin graft and rebuilding a limb that’s been through a wood chipper from the bucket of parts.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 3 weeks ago:
I’m scientifically trained (physics specifically), I’m also an atheist myself. I believe, based on a preponderance of evidence, that no creator being exists. The exception possibly being the simulation hypothesis. However, without specific evidence of that, the chances are extremely slim so I default to the null, aka atheism.
Interestingly, science has very few “facts”. Facts are mostly a thing of mathematics , which can create rigorous proofs. There is a lot of evidence in science, along with predictions and theories, but few facts.
E.g. I don’t know, for a fact, that the sun will rise in 1 year’s time. The evidence says it’s practically a certainty, but it is not a true “fact”. It’s a prediction based on an absurdly large evidence base.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 3 weeks ago:
Atheism does require belief. Even if it’s only in the axioms of physics.
As per my analogy, bald is not a haircut, but an absence of hair. You would be hard pressed to find a bald person who complained about it being lumped in with haircuts in a form.
Recognising the limits to our own knowledge is an important part of finding the truth.
Oh and the options “on fire” and “not on fire” obviously belong in the same grouping, even if they are different things.
- Comment on Anon ruins christmas 3 weeks ago:
Atheism is as much a belief as bald is a haircut. Technically slightly different, but makes sense to throw into the same box.
Learning that being right doesn’t make you not an arsehole is a lesson too many of us had to learn the hard way.
The satanic temple’s 7th tenet sums it up quite well.
Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
- Comment on Week-long heatwave due in England with 34C peak in south-east 3 weeks ago:
The ground has been dried out. It doesn’t happen often.
Also humidity is relative. Hot air holds a lot more water. The same amount of water will have a lower humidity, for a higher temperature.
- Comment on Ofsted drops ‘clumsy’ and ‘offensive’ guidance linking autism and extremism 3 weeks ago:
For those confused. The training tried to say that autistic people were more likely to be socially isolated. That then makes them more likely to be “befriended” into extremism.
It was akin to saying “black people commit more petty crimes”. While technically true (poor people commit more petty crimes, and a disproportionate number of blacks are poorer), it runs roughshod over the people it’s trying to protect/help.
- Comment on What can be done to prevent more dangerous heatwaves in Europe? 4 weeks ago:
Deep ocean algae farms might do it. Oil companies have brought up and side lined research on it for decades however.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 5 weeks ago:
It’s read by multiple fans, doing a chapter each. It’s been years since I listened to it however, so the details are now quite hazy.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 5 weeks ago:
That’s the correct one.
There’s also an audiobook version. Though it’s fan read, so a bit less consistent than most listeners would expect.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 5 weeks ago:
It’s a dark gritty type sorry, before that became fashionable, with a lot of world building and explanation. You either love it or just can’t get into it.
In-story it’s the difference between a family bickering and fighting, Vs them suddenly fending off the text chain saw massacre.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 5 weeks ago:
It takes the author a while to find their groove and start establishing the storylines, rather than just the world building. I understand what you mean though. I think a lot of people like it for the world building aspects rather than the writing style.
I can’t remember how it breaks down chapter wise, but If you made it to the first endbringer fight, and don’t like it, it’s not your style.
- Comment on A FYI from Skeletor 5 weeks ago:
The web serial Worm (Parahumans) has an excellent take on this.
The unwritten rules. Heros have to limit property damage, and not go lethal unless absolutely required. Villains, in turn, don’t go lethal on heros or civilians.
Both groups also respect each other’s secret identities, unless they out themselves. Heros because villains can get nasty if backed into a corner too badly. Villains because going after a cape’s family is a good way to get a kill order, and a heavy hitter involved.
In story there are also world ending threats. When one turns up, villains that are willing to help are out of bounds for retaliation. If they are willing to help, they are treated like any other cape.
End result, all the weird rules of heros and villains suddenly make logical sense. No-one wants to break the status quo.
It also leads to some funny encounters out of costume, or with new costumes.
- Comment on What do you do if you lose an argument, but it turns out that you were actually right? 5 weeks ago:
It depends if it was a discussion or an argument.
A discussion is a search for a common truth/understanding. Both parties need to be willing to adjust their views if the other person has a good point.
An argument is generally when you know you are right. Often it’s intended for the attention of those watching/listening. You’re not trying to convince the other person, but those who would otherwise listen to them.
Arguments with only the other person present are quite pointless.
As for your question. If it were a discussion, I would go back to them to see what they make of the evidence.
If it’s an argument, let it lie, unless they start spouting it to others in your presence. Then it’s down to you to counter them or not.
FYI, back in my uni days, a friend and I would clear the house with our “heated arguments” (atheist Vs devout Christian). When the rest of the house commented on this, we just both looked at each other in confusion. We had both been discussing and learning from each other. It might have gotten loud, but it never turned into an argument!
- Comment on UK weather: Amber extreme heat warning issued as 35C heatwave approaches 5 weeks ago:
I’ve just been looking at a graph of historical peak summer temperatures. In the 70s the peak was 35.9°C, with a majority being below 30°C. Back then 30°C was extremely hot.
A lot of homes were already standing back then, with most modern homes built on the same ethos.
- Comment on UK weather: Amber extreme heat warning issued as 35C heatwave approaches 5 weeks ago:
For the UK anything over 30 is extreme heat.
The fact we have been getting more and more of them is the reason it’s started to be seen as “normal”.
- Comment on UK weather: Amber extreme heat warning issued as 35C heatwave approaches 5 weeks ago:
Good on both points.
Installing on the outside is a complete pain in the arse however. The superfoil is reflective enough that the extra gain wasn’t worth the extra hassle. It also looks a lot better from the outside (if it matters to you what the neighbours think).
As for the foil. It works, but is very hard to apply. Milar space blankets are a bit easier, but not much. That’s how I ended up with the super foil. It’s stiff enough to handle, but flexible enough to roll up for storage. A cardboard backing also makes sense, though it would have made storage harder for me.
It’s also worth noting to not leave it up for too long. Cannabis growers use a similar method to try and hide drug labs. You might get a visit from the police (hopefully politely) if it’s up for too long.
- Comment on UK weather: Amber extreme heat warning issued as 35C heatwave approaches 5 weeks ago:
Some advice.
Firstly, the night before, get as much of the heat out of your home as you can, for as long as you can. Bricks have a lot of thermal mass. They take a while to cool down, but also to heat back up. If you can, open an upper most window, and a lower window or door. It creates a chimney effect that pulls the hot air up and out.
Once the temperature starts to rise, close up your home! You want to keep the hot air out, and the cool air in.
I would also recommend getting some super foil insulation. It’s like a stiff, metallic bubble wrap. Put it in your sun facing windows and it will keep the heat out amazingly. I brought some suction cups with a wing nut on the other side. They make mounting and removing it a lot easier.
Lastly, lower the humidity. The humidity turns warm into brain melting. It stops your sweat from being as effective. Don’t use an electric dehumidifier, since they put out heat. The single use ones are more effective. At least for a small room. The lower humidity will make it a lot more comfortable.
For comparison, working in the middle east, I could keep working through a 45°C mid day. In the UK I start to have issues closer to 25°C. The main difference was humidity.
These bits can also help make a portable Aircon unit a LOT more effective. During the 40°C+ heatwave the other year, I needed it for only 1 hour in the afternoon to keep the temperature comfortable for me and my dog.
- Comment on What's the evolutionary advantage of very long hair on human heads? 1 month ago:
A built in sun hat.
- Comment on Fafo 1 month ago:
No department, government or commercial likes giving up resources, once it has them. This can cause them to become quite inefficient.
In commercial companies, this is corrected for by financial pressures (imperfectly). In government systems there is no obvious mechanism. Instead it’s a lot more ad-hoc. This allows for things like “starving the beast” to break government functions. Conversely it allows for a lot of public money being funneled into private hands.
A better option is to have systems in place to control spending. Critically, those systems need to have people who understand what is being done. They simultaneously allow for reduction in spending when appropriate (or at least stop run away), but stop the chainsaw to the knees approach (e.g. DOGE under musk).
A good example would be something like the UKs NHS NICE (National institute for Clinical Excellence). They keep drug prices under control in the NHS. They are powerful enough to give pause to the drugs companies, they stop the government from going “chainsaw massacre” directly and they keep the NHS efficient in their area. They are also small enough to not bloat themselves as easily.
They act as a 2 way shield. They stop governments sticking their oar in too directly. They also keep the service efficient and updated.
Basically we need localised intelligence to filter what rolls down from higher government, while keeping those below accountable.
In this case, it seems like they over trimmed the science. Some stand down from full height is reasonable, but no mothballed facilities were kept to rapidly spool back up in an emergency.
- Comment on The Real Purpose of Wealth 💸 1 month ago:
I’d guess the flip over point is maybe a bit higher. I can see definite gains up to 500,000-1,000,000 a year.
I suspect the cut off is around there however. Assuming the same base work level to get it.
I could personally live VERY happily on 100k a year, but not afford EVERYTHING I could reasonably want.
- Comment on Fafo 1 month ago:
Any government run system needs something to trim the bloat down. Otherwise there is nothing to stop it becoming dangerous. Capitalism relies on profit motives to do this. It works, to an extent.
The problem comes with how to trim. E.g. this programme. Once the barrier was established, it could be trimmed. The fact it worked for 25 years after is proof of this. This (in theory) would free up resources for more critical tasks. The catch is that it needed to hard protect the barrier itself. It also needed the capability to rapidly scale back up. It seems that that was trimmed too, leading to the current crisis.
A dam is a good analogy. It takes a lot of resources to build one. But far less to run and maintain it. You also need the option for emergency maintenance, but that can be shared with other dams or construction projects, when not needed.
The first trim got rid of the construction budget. DOGE got rid of the maintenance budget. Now the dam needs rebuilding, not just maintaining.
- Comment on The Real Purpose of Wealth 💸 1 month ago:
A lot of people do exactly that.
Money has a strong diminishing return to happiness. Once you have enough to do what you want, and keep up that lifestyle from investments, you’ve “won”.
Most who goes past that point are self selected as problematic personalities. They’ve figured out that more money = more power = more happy. When they are not happy, they obviously need to work harder to get more money. This doesn’t make them happy and the feedback loop continues.
I would actually be curious if the curve goes negative after a while. There’s a point where more money gets isolating. That is well past the point where the happiness gain becomes negligible too.
- Comment on no chances for life around red dwarfs 1 month ago:
Silicon’s conditions would make it difficult. It has far less inorganic precursor molecules to work from. It might work under cryogenic conditions, but that has a bunch of other problems.
The titanium one is new to me, and potentially interesting. My concern would be an abiogenic pathway. It might be able to form interesting molecules for life, but if they don’t appear naturally, then getting life started gets massively more difficult.
There’s also a hell of a lot of options with carbon based life. Earth life is VERY locked into a few variants with our base biochemistry. E.g. there’s no reason for particular RNA sequences to match particular Protein peptides. Yet it’s basically a universal thing. Even chirality is fixed, for no particular reason other than mixing causes issues.
I could potentially see a dual based life system working, effectively a more advanced version of how some creatures use metals to make shells etc, or how horns and hair grow. It could also provide a viable (though extremely convoluted) bootstrap process for titanium life, or something more exotic. Forcing life to change its core functionality however is apparently quite difficult, since no life on earth seems to have done so and survived to be detected. Rocky, in Project Hail Mary, would fall into this group (a carbon life core basically piloting a stone and metal mech).
- Comment on no chances for life around red dwarfs 1 month ago:
What combinations are you thinking of?
Life on earth is based around Carbon chains. Carbon’s 4 bonds allows for a low of complex structures that would be hard/impossible for less bonds.
The only other viable option I know of is silicon. Unfortunately its chain equivalent has an extra reaction pathway with water. It would degrade rapidly if exposed to water, which is very common at the energies it would work at.
I’d be curious to look up any other viable options.