A gummy isn’t a hemp product. A gummy is a candy infused with a hemp product.

The article’s claim about gummies is supported only by shops, not by courts.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/fda-regu...

I'm not sure if there was a specific article your trying to link me to - that's just a list of all FDA cannabis regulation articles.

I'll admit that I didn't read much of the article. My knowledge comes mostly from working in hemp from 2017-2019. I was asking back then went people weren't doing this since, based on my reading of the law, it seemed perfectly legal (if not very sketchy). I'm not sure if the regulations have been updated since then, but it seems like 'no' based on current behavior

I don’t follow. Even if the hemp product is still of sufficiently low concentration, eating enough of it will cause an effect.

put another way, instead of eating one (1) THC gummy, you get a bag of 0.3% gummy worms and eat the bag.

might get you fat in the process -- lotta calories in gummies -- but if you're getting that much THC you're probably gonna eat a buncha candy anyway

Initially I was thinking it was 0.3% by weight, which would be no big deal -- a gummy worm under 3.5g would be legal for 10mg of THC. But it's 0.3% by volume! What volume does 10mg of THC take up? Quick search didn't make it clear... but I think you'd need probably a little over a liter of liquid to get 10mg of THC at a concentration of no more than 0.3%. Not terrible, but I could see a silly product called "hemp water" that's just a 1.5L bottle of water with hemp-derived THC in it.

For an edible it'd probably be a bit painful.. a whole bag of gummies (and then some) like you suggest...

In the article it says "0.3 percent or less of the product’s dry weight"

It’s a thought experiment for how mathematicians could have assumed the continuum hypothesis, and how dangerously close they came to making that mistake. It’s not an argument in favor of CH.

I recognize your name and believe you know what you are talking about, so please, please tell us the why! You or someone you know probable has a blog post or article you can link, maybe?

Wow I never look at usernames but maybe I should start. I believe I read his `Gauge Fields, Knots, and Gravity` back in college (or tried to, anyways. it was a touch above my level at the time)

Why? Humans aren’t seeking out quality content now, when most popular content is spam advertising, rage bait, and propaganda.

Is that actually true?

Lots of people have. From Amish to communes to cults.

The term "dad joke" is already promoting a stereotype.

Is it a harmful stereotype though?

It’s extremely niche (abstract, “Platonic”) to ever need to care about derivatives of non piecewise-analytic functions.

I think of wavelets and stochastic processes to be a significantly bigger niche than you probably do.

Usually when people say this, it's because learning something for the first time is harder than learning something you already know.

Lean is for verifying proofs, not writing them. It helps you find mistakes, but doesn’t help you understand or express ideas in a human readable way.

Rich people have the power to fight. Poorer people get the precedent for free.

I do believe that rich parties should pay for their use of precious court time,