Had a fun IT shame experience the other day I thought I'd share. An installed app dropped a shortcut on the desktop, and for whatever reason in windows, if you drag certain shortcuts to the trash it asks for admin permission.
Tried multiple times to delete, rebooted, etc. But eventually I was annoyed and desparate so I took it to IT to get quick admin permission. He selected the shortcut, hit the delete key, and it disappeared, no admin prompt. I've never felt so ashamed. But also why the fuck is that functioning as intended Windows?
As someone in the market for a new sound system - looking for recommendations for something wireless w/ Dolby Atmos. Any suggestions?
The downvotes are because the comment lacks a little context. Impossible meat isn't around to replace vegetables, it's around to replace ground beef, which is pretty generally regarded as not healthy to begin with. And adding to that, the other processed fake meat products (chicken nuggets, hot dogs, sausages, ......) Are really just 1:1 swaps for processed meats.
My guess is at least 99.97% of people aren't grinding their own free range antibiotic free chicken into a pulp, then stamping them into Dino shapes and breading them with organic flour, before frying them in hand pressed olive oil from their organic olive orchard.
Fake meats often aren't great for you, but generally speaking, neither are the things they're trying to replace.
Clearly there's some passion here. Can you elaborate on this? As someone who is not Canadian, I'm not fully in the loop. Are there credible examples of anti-hate-speech laws in Canada being used to prosecute people for things other than hate speech?
Really quality content from a 1-day-old account. Thank you for your insightful contribution and definitely not being yet another troll from the troll farm.
Yeah, always site:reddit.com if I need it, SEO spam has gotten so trashy.
We've had one, yes. What about second hottest day?
Vegan here, no hate from me - we can debate your use of the word "supposed" until we both pass out, but at the end of the day, I'm 100% supportive of the "weekday vegan / vegetarian" - people who save meat for weekends/special occasions (and I would strongly encourage those weekend meat eaters to avoid red meat at all times both for their health and the environment).
Idk about grass specifically, but generally the answer for most standard cattle feed is no. There are seaweeds that can be added to cow's food that can help reduce methane emissions, but the most successful approach is to just stop eating cows.
Pfft, calendars, like birds, aren't real. Haven't you ever heard of the butterfly effect?
A butterfly could flap its wings in Istanbul and cause the whole universe to collapse on itself in an instant. How could you possibly go on to predict the passage of time with that kind chaos and uncertainty?
Yeah I do, but please stop sending me unsolicited dick 'paths. Just because they're secure doesn't mean they're wanted.
... I can't tell if this is sarcasm or an honest question...
Is there a viable Republican candidate who doesn't have a record that shows 'a pattern of prioritizing fossil fuel interests'? The GOP is effectively the party of 'prioritizing fossil fuel interests'.
I think you misinterpreted my comment, the point was they're obviously doing this because they want to continue to deny climate change, but that's like 1% of what NOAA does.
Because the title says "1000x more powerful than existing panels". The article clarifies that this is existing barium panels, but the title (I would argue misleadingly so) does not clarify that they aren't referring to existing silicone solar panels.
Especially misleading because of the use of the word "existing" because it sounds like they're referring to something that has made it out of a lab, but I'd wager 99.99999+% of people have never seen an "existing" barium solar panel.
A less misleading title would be something like:
Experimental barium solar panel 10000x more efficient than past attempts, possibility of performance parity with silicon in sight
Or some such nonsense. You could move the second half to a subtitle and still be much clearer and less misleading than the original in title alone.
Saw this question posted elsewhere, so I'm paraphrasing somebody else, but the privacy benefits of Graphene OS are ESPECIALLY impactful if you're using invasive apps. The whole point of setting up all of the extra sandboxing, storage limits, network restrictions, yadda yadda yadda, is specifically for people who might need or want to still leverage some apps from bigger, less trusted providers.
I'll flip the question, if you're only using trusted, vetted, open source applications, do you even need GrapheneOS? Why not LineageOS, which also comes free of gapps?
And this also fully neglects the inherent distinction between privacy and security. Maybe you trust google knowing you called your mom last night, but you don't want your oppressive conservative government accessing your phone to view your Signal messages to your Grinder date. There's more to privacy than just the number of times your phone pings Google Telemetry servers.
Fuck climate change, NOAA provides hurricane and heat warnings. They're what most weather providers use as the basis for telling people if you should grab an umbrella on your way out the door
Starting a culture war with the weather is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. What's your end game? Weatherman Alex Jones telling Floridians to go to the beach because the hurricane is just going to glide by safely and bring a nice cool breeze to the shore to keep you comfy?
Dairy farmers in Denmark face having to pay an annual tax of 672 krone ($96) per cow for the planet-heating emissions they generate.
“Everybody is looking for the magic tree.”
Read our sustainability trends predictions for 2024. This year, our top trends include eco-tourism, recycling initiatives, and green F&B.
The Port of Oakland is home to the United States' first commercial hydrogen fuel station for big-rig trucks. It's a step on the road to cleaner trucking.
Guest post: How shifting diets away from beef could cut Brazil’s emissions
Food systems are responsible for around one-third of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions – and beef has the largest carbon footprint of any food.
The first study to quantify what our felines eat on a global scale finds they have a significant impact on wildlife
A poll finds less than one-third of Americans want a fully electric home. It jumps to 60 percent if people can continue cooking with gas.
A knife-edge quest: Lord of the Rings resonates at COP28 climate summit | Larry Elliott
Tolkien’s hostility to rampant industrialisation should chime with the nations represented in Dubai
The international COP28 climate summit has reached an agreement on the logistics of a loss and damage fund, a mechanism to compensate vulnerable nations for the impact of climate change, organizers…
“It would have huge consequences — a lot of them probably not anticipated,” one researcher said.
One of the thorniest problems of the 21st century is how to get people to eat less meat. A new poll conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that most U.S. adults said they eat meat at least several times a week.
WASHINGTON (November 14, 2023) – Global efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C are failing across the board, with recent progress made on every indicator — except electric passenger car sales — lagging significantly behind the pace and scale that is necessary to address the climate crisis, according to t...
Eating less beef, cheese, and ice cream would slash emissions. But given the nation's taste for them, science strives to make climate-friendlier cows.
"Wherever you go, whatever you do, if it involves revealing anything about the devastating impacts of animal agriculture... you are beaten down for it," said one advocate.
Why a carbon tax on investment income could make it less profitable to pollute
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/3345069
> Following up on an paper posted earlier this week on disproportionate carbon emissions based on income. This article, by one of the paper's authors, proposes the possibility of imposing carbon tax on investment income as a more equitable means of influencing emissions. > > >Instead of putting the responsibility for cutting emissions on consumers, maybe policies should more directly tie that responsibility to corporate executives, board members, and investors who have the most knowledge and power over their industries. Based on our analysis of the consumption and income benefits produced by greenhouse gas emissions, I believe a shareholder-based carbon tax is worth exploring.
Why a carbon tax on investment income could make it less profitable to pollute
Following up on an paper posted earlier this week on disproportionate carbon emissions based on income. This article, by one of the paper's authors, proposes the possibility of imposing carbon tax on investment income as a more equitable means of influencing emissions.
>Instead of putting the responsibility for cutting emissions on consumers, maybe policies should more directly tie that responsibility to corporate executives, board members, and investors who have the most knowledge and power over their industries. Based on our analysis of the consumption and income benefits produced by greenhouse gas emissions, I believe a shareholder-based carbon tax is worth exploring.
"Without policies such as regulations or taxes on very polluting investments, it's unlikely that wealthy individuals making a lot of money from fossil fuel investments will stop investing in them," says one economist.
It’s the IRA’s First Birthday. Here Are Five Areas Where Progress Is Piling Up
The Inflation Reduction Act promised an unprecedented wave of clean energy investment. One year in, here’s where we’re seeing progress.
New California Legislation Would Be a Major Step Forward for Climate Disclosure
This piece previously appeared in the CLS Blue Sky Blog. The Securities and Exchange Commission regulations on climate disclosure, first proposed in March 2022 and likely to be issued in final form in October 2023,[1] have drawn considerable controversy and face an uncertain fate in the inevita...
"Underwriting is a huge missing piece of net-zero transition plans, allowing big U.S. banks to continue to help fossil fuel companies raise billions of dollars with limited scrutiny," said one campaigner.
