NYC is highly walkable, and very large. Same with London.
The benefits of large walkable cities is that people get motivated to do urban 'hikes' and the hours of exercise are much larger than in typical cities (especially compared to walking and cycling unfriendly cities).
As far as 'conspiracy theorists' this represents a vast spectrum of individuals, and no doubt that would be foolish to lump into a single one-dimensional stereotype unless your aim is some sort of propaganda or social conditioning.
>As far as 'conspiracy theorists' this represents a vast spectrum of individuals, and no doubt that would be foolish to lump into a single one-dimensional stereotype unless your aim is some sort of propaganda or social conditioning.
Exactly; this type of anti-walkable-city thought is totally normal for probably a majority of the US population. NYC is indeed walkable, but it doesn't represent America at all, and half the country sneers at the city and hates it, and anything that resembles it.
Coffee is an anti-thiamine factor (because of compounds like caffeic acid, which also exist in Dcaf). It also hinders absorption of thiamine and minerals such as iron. Other than modifying nutrient absorption, it also has benefits, such as raising stomach acid, which is beneficial for protein rich meals. So coffee with a real breakfast (eg., hash browns and eggs) should be beneficial.
Coffee on an empty stomach is not good over repeated long term occasions, as it leads to cortisol spikes. If empty-stomaching coffee, it is a good time to pop some trace metal and mineral pills (iron, manganese, zinc, selenium, chromium, moly, boron, magnesium).
Any problems with thiamine are easily reversed via thiamine supplementation. I try to take B-50 complex two or three times a week, and a thiamine supplement on alternate days, roughly at the same frequency.
Coffee does seem to have net benefits. It's good against brain cloud.
If anyone is looking for a fun numerical simulation project I highly recommend reading up on the Vortex Lattice Method, which is an approximation that turns a problem of fluid mechanics into a the problem of solving a system of linear equations.
I have an "old" computer that is beefy enough to play games but doesn't meet the arbitrary requirements for Windows 11. I'm not brave enough to try a non-windows gaming machine again.
The biggest fear you should have is windows 10 installers losing their capability to install win 10 when they call home.
I've been on Manjaro (xfce image, which feels like XP with updated taskbar search) for about a year, even though in the past I've hated attempts to use a linux desktop (Even came with Steam already installed and working).
This will take a few years, though. Then, they will switch the servers off (silently or loudly, depending on their strategy - e.g. Adobe prefers to kill them silently).
At that point your only hope are pirate copies. I was always wondering how that scenario would stand in court. After all, you bought something that was complete, and then, due to someone's arbitrary decision, stopped to work. It's basically a remote kill-switch. Should you be punished for removing the possibility of someone's deliberately damaging the product you bought?
I’ve gotten to a point where Windows is now my least favorite OS, but the fact of the matter is that modern Windows has the widest gaming compatibility of all operating systems.
Proton/Steam seem like the only ones who could possibly challenge that at this point.
I got steam going perfectly on MX linux, but the AMDGPU setup was a royal PITA to get working. Took me days to figure out. Definitely not turnkey. Maybe ubuntu is better in this regard, but too far open sores for my taste.
I'm wondering as Windows 10 EOL approaches if Microsoft is going to blink and backtrack on the hardware requirements for Windows 11.
I only have 2 personal PCs that are officially capable of running Windows 11 so pretty much every other machine I own will be moved to Linux once Windows 10 reaches EOL.
It gets orbital speed and kinetic energy from the aircraft.
Being dropped from a 747 the kinetic energy is far smaller than the potential energy. The 747 goes perhaps mach 0.8-something with a ceiling over 40,000 ft; say roughly 14 km.
That potential energy is equivalent to about 530 m/s.
(So, in terms of energy, you are comparing a bit under Mach 1 with a bit over Mach 1.5.) sqrt(2 g h) if you want to do the arithmetic: g=10m/s/s and h=14km.
So added together we are talking about Mach 2.5 equivalent launch speed from the aircraft stage, from an airliner like a 747 or 707. This is significant. Remember you're also doing the equivalent of accelerating the propellant that would be needed to accelerate the rocket up to this energy.
Now if you launch it from something like a military craft (Mig 31 or Tu-160) then you can ballpark add another Mach 1, so we're in the ballpark Mach 3.5 region. Probably exceeding Mach 4 for the Mig 31, but of course it only could launch a small orbital rocket.
Now Kerbal is an interesting way to get very crude approximations. And the reason usually that my above simple calculation ends up not impressing as much as it should is that the orbital rocket needs to transition from a horizontal flight path to something much steeper, or it will take a very long path through the upper atmosphere. This long path ends up creating a huge amount of friction eating into much of your gains imparted by the air launch.
Even though the atmosphere ~30 km high is incredibly thin, it will burn your vehicle that is racing though it at speeds that are ballpark Mach 10 (possibly considerably higher). In other words, massive amounts of friction.
A ground launched vehicle can take almost the shortest way, and pierce the atmophere with minimal friction---almost a vertical path through. That is ground launch's biggest advantage. It will pierce the thickest part of the atmosphere vertically and gracefully and optimally arc into a horizontal path near its peak (the height of the orbit).
The rocket achieves orbit from the potential energy plus the kinetic energy. (Both kinetic and potential energy factor need to be a taken into account at the time the air drop.)
Yeah it's a hunger suppressant but it can wear out your adrenals if you use it that way regularly and very often. (spikes cortisol if you drink it on an empty stomach; I think it's either the chlorogenic acid).
Coffee is best with a meal; it raises the stomach acid, which improves digestion of the meal. Plus you don't get the cortisol spike when it's taken with a substantial meal.
Definitely wean yourself away from adding sugar to coffee. I have it without any sugar, but a bit of cream, and nible a pastry along side drinking the coffee. So if you can nibble on something sweet, absolutely skip the added sugar in the coffee.
unless you keep your cell phone a few cm away from your body physically you are generally exposed to above thermal limits (assuming you have airplane mode off and data or wifi enabled). Even the periodic tower pings may be above thermal limits, though typically they are short burts over very high intensity.
And then there's this risk (below) which should make you think twice about putting your telephone in your pant or jacket pockets.
And now back to the thermal limits. If you are exposed above thermal limits you are raising your cancer risks. This was known since the 40s (eg ww 2 radar operators) and is well established. In the past few decades the only debate was whether sub thermal limits of microwave and UHF and higher frequency RF raises cancer risks; the evidence is slowly piling up, and it seems those urging caution are being proven correct.
The conspiracy theory movies should be about Evil AI's™ protecting their profitability by sending quiet helicopters with paratrooper ninjas to silence some dude on a park bench eating a hoagie.
Also robocatfishing and 419 scams, perhaps where an owner's AI avatar is duped by scammer AIs into giving them all of their money and going on "dates" with people who don't exist.
The benefits of large walkable cities is that people get motivated to do urban 'hikes' and the hours of exercise are much larger than in typical cities (especially compared to walking and cycling unfriendly cities).
As far as 'conspiracy theorists' this represents a vast spectrum of individuals, and no doubt that would be foolish to lump into a single one-dimensional stereotype unless your aim is some sort of propaganda or social conditioning.