explore_broaden

joined 1 year ago
[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Seems like a reasonable headline in this case given the content of the article.

But the potential for researchers to bias the outcomes of these trials has become a common critique of the psychedelic research field. It is unusual for a drug under F.D.A. consideration to also be used personally and recreationally by the researchers studying it, or even for clinical trial researchers and clinicians to be encouraged to test the drug themselves. But that’s exactly what Lykos has done with MDMA.

I agree that there’s no problem now, and also that the percentage they are trying to pay is overly low. I think they should be paying somewhere in the vicinity of 50-70% of the buy price, so that is a terrible rate.

[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn’t say net metering isn’t useful now, I said it wouldn’t work if a large majority of people did it. I don’t see how what you said contradicts that.

No, the burden of providing free energy storage.

[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Sure, but if everyone does it then it wouldn’t work (no one would be drawing excess when the solar is at peak), so that makes it not very sustainable. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, just that it can’t continue to work if adoption becomes near-universal (it doesn’t seem to be for now). I guess these non-bypassable charges will fix that, but that sounds a lot like what they are talking about (only getting paid some large percentage of the price for energy sent to the grid).

[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 5 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

It doesn’t really seem like net metering is sustainable. Say for example someone generates the same amount of electricity they use, in that case they pay $0 for electricity even though the grid has to take the burden of storing the electricity until they use it later in the day.

The agency (FTC) can seek civil penalties, I do not see anywhere that companies could bring a lawsuit that they couldn’t before (libel?).

Yes, thank you for the correction. I edited it.

[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

This is not suggesting the rice be overcooked, just cooked using a different process.

[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
  1. This seems to mainly be a concern in places where a lot of rice is consumed and there is no legal limit for arsenic in rice (many parts of Asia), not necessarily in the US where there is an FDA limit and most people don’t eat rice every day.
  2. It saves time, water, and energy compared to other ways of reducing arsenic, like using the excess water method with large excesses of water. Parboiling in with 4 times the water by weight and then cooking in 2 times the water by weight uses less water than cooking once in 10-12 times the water by weight (half the water). Heating half as much water to boiling reduces energy use and time (assuming constant heating power in W from the stove). Of course it’s still slower than cooking rice using the absorption method common in many places (this is not necessarily how people in some countries cook rice).
[–] explore_broaden@midwest.social 15 points 2 weeks ago

This is a growing problem due to climate change (higher temperatures seem to increase arsenic uptake) and pollutants, so this doesn’t make any sense.

A scripting language written in Rust would certainly fulfill you requirement of only needing to copy one file since they are always statically linked and you can even statically compile against musl so it will work on any Linux system without needing a correct libc. Maybe check out rhai.

view more: ‹ prev next ›