I like thermometers. I don’t like partition functions.

What is the temperature of 50 atoms when extended to bulk conditions?

They’ve been playing us as absolute fools.

I know it is quite common to ask in gay dating apps. Many people in there have a full set of naked photos that they send out to others on request.

I’m not so sure about women.

Nothing she wrote seems like classism to me. The way you put it, a lawyer should avoid mentioning he’s a lawyer as that would display he was educated and thus insulting people who couldn’t.

She’s probably complaining with her friends and reflecting about what happens. In her work life she is a respected person who does important things which are recognised by her peers.

In her datings she has to go over people who can not come up with a better idea than to send a dick pic. This is a terrible thing, but some people may get desperate and accept some of these inepts. She’s reminding herself that she’s doesn’t really need to have these kinds of interactions.

Is there a classist message in there? I guess the main message is: I’m a smart person, I don’t need to put up with this. She does not insult those people as Poor’s or people who did not study. As far are we know people sending those pictures may be millionaires (and I wouldn’t be surprised).

Tobacco has been used regularly for way longer and in much larger quantities than cannabis. There’s been much more attention on tobacco as it is something that through the past few centuries was widely spread across society.

Widespread usage of cannabis is something moderately recent.

Cannabis is also consumed in smaller quantities: an average user may smoke one or two cigarettes a day, while a tobacco smoker easily smokes 10 to 20. Moreover, tobacco is legal while cannabis has been illegal in most places until very recently when it started being allowed in a few countries. This leads to much more data regarding tobacco available than for cannabis.

wouldn’t the US be an imperial proxy of Israel

No. I don’t see how you could think or justify the US being a proxy of Israel.

It may be the other way around, however one of the two countries is clearly stronger. One of the two countries could pull out of the war by just leaving, if they really wanted to.

Please, if you do that rm / -rf and you’re really looking into that path to make sure it’s correct.

Good morning, the list of known carcinogens is quite short. It is quite short because the evidence required to get on that list is quite extensive. This is an article explaining the basics of how that list works: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/25081-carcinogens It is not a comprehensive explanation of how it is made, but it explains the basic reasoning behind it.

Knowing a compound is carcinogenic is not enough to link it to something being carcinogenic with high statistical reliability. The reason why that list exists is that statistical evidence is more reliable than scientific evidence. You can build a scientific model to explain why something happens, but that always has some assumptions. A large enough statistical sample has a much higher confidence. We know that pure benzene is carcinogenic, that is why it’s mostly prohibited to use in research and production. Do we know if other products containing benzene are carcinogenic because of benzene? Not really.

We can make an assumption: products who contain benzene and to whom people are regularly exposed are carcinogenic. It does indeed make sense as an hypothesis, however we don’t know if it is true with statistical reliability. It may be true for some mixtures and not for others. This is in my opinion sufficient evidence to link some in general to cancer. Do we have any proof that any kind of smoke other than tobacco causes cancer? No, we do not.

However, the fact that we do not have such evidence does not mean that smoke does not cause cancer. We have strong evidence that smoke causes cancer, however we can not prove it with enough statistical reliability. We can not prove it statistically because this kind of studies is complicated to perform as it requires data that is difficult to obtain. You have to study a large sample of people, tens or hundreds of thousands, throughout their life while they perform one such action. As such you’d need to follow a large group of users who smoke cannabis and are open to receiving regular checkups and interviews. You also need a negative control: a group of people who does not smoke marijuana. However, tobacco and red meat are also known carcinogens; to exclude whether they got cancer from these causes you’d need separate groups to compare to: people who smoke marijuana but not tobacco, people who also smoke tobacco, people who smoke both and eat red meat, people who smoke marijuana, no tobacco but eat meat, people who smoke marijuana not tobacco and no meat. Now add to this that being an hairdresser is a known carcinogens and you’ll start to understand why obtaining a definitive answer is difficult despite the fact that many studies exist.

Proper government funded tooling for office work and scientific research would be great.

I can not imagine an alternative to the office suite would need much more investment than the European Union spends each year in licensing it.

Licensing of scientific software easily goes up to 100k/year per user.

but a wide swathe of studies has failed to ever conclusively establish a connection between cannabis smoke and cancer.

The list of known carcinogens is quite short. That is mostly because it is difficult to conduct studies with a large enough sample to be sure that something is a carcinogen with high statistical reliability.

Given our current knowledge, it may be argued that eating fast food every day is not bad for you, as there are no conclusive studies linking it to increased death rates.

In the laboratory, most mutagenic compounds are labelled as mutagenic despite the fact that they are not known carcinogens.

There’s plenty studies linking smoke to diseases. Smoke is a known toxic agent.

While you may be tempted to measure volumes with a beaker, for the love of God don’t use a graduated cylinder on the hotplate!

Cannabis smoke is not a recognised carcinogenic agent. That is different from saying there’s no evidence linking it to cancer.

It’s smoke in the lungs on a regular basis. That’s plenty evidence.

The article discussed in depth how bad technical decisions made Microsoft product bad quality and unreliable. They they propose that this is the reason why Microsoft lost potential contracts with openai.

Floating point errors are what eventually convinced God to make the universe the way it is. The initial plan was to have all properties be continuous, but that resulted in many floating point errors. That’s when he said: fuck it, quantum states are discrete.

I guess the advantage of IPv6 would be to get rid of NATs. If we just keep the same architecture and switch to IPv6 while retaining NATs, then I really see no advantage in switching. It would just be a pain in the ass.

You just revolutionised my workflow

GDP growth of the European Union past year was about 1.5%. I wouldn’t say a 3% of extra “free” money is a negligible amount.

Indeed, the US did not bring trains there where only cows were being bred by farmers, but the influence of the Marshall plan was big in the countries most affected by it. Regardless of what the actual aims and intentions of the plan were.

Man, chill out and learn to have a conversation. Insults were absolutely uncalled for. If there’s a misunderstanding in the wording of things you should try to solve it in order to carry on a conversation online.

Enjoy the sunny day!

Gave us lots of money.

Easily fixed by defining wealth as wealth + 1.