People on Lemmy will believe literally anything you tell them as long as you make it about a corporation or billionaire.

The example in the OP is very obviously food grade plastic, specifically engineered for those use cases

1. this will save precisely zero lives
2. you ignore the broader impact of allowing brazen broad-daylight murder to be endorsed by the public under any conditions. It is not just this one life
3. insurance is a mess and I am sure this guy was a dick, and that UHC denies plenty of claims that should be accepted. But at risk of pointing out the obvious, an insurance company that never denies any claims will go bankrupt immediately, and would therefore result in many more deaths since nobody would be covered.

There’s no rack mount server there. I see a UPS, switch (network and Nintendo varieties), PS4 and mini PC

Sure, I guess, in the same way that all the water in your body was once dinosaur piss

Contract killers don’t really exist, and even if they did, it’s obviously not covered by the legal system, so, you do.

I’m… Not really sure what your question is. What do you mean by your laptop “fitting in the community?”

It happens pretty frequently in tech job listings, to have a requirement listed for more years experience in some technology than that technology has existed

I mean… Babies and small children don’t “choose” what language to learn, they just pick up whatever’s spoken regularly around them. So whatever their families and community speak, same as everyone else?

Yeah, which nobody would “expect” you to if you’re not from there

Where are you getting this impression? I’ve never gotten any sense that anyone outside the city is “expected” to know its geography. “Expected” how?

Also there are only 5 boroughs

Any concept this was ever a thing will be buried beneath the sands of time within your lifetime. You, too, will forget it completely. Nobody will ever think it peculiar because nobody will ever think of it at all.

it’s also not that weird

Are you under the impression that they don’t?

“digestible” and “nutritious” aren’t social constructs, so no. If your body can transform it chemically in a way that produces energy, it’s food. Otherwise it’s not. The same things are food regardless of your culture.

I’m really trying to make this one make sense, but it’s just not happening. Can you rephrase?

Everyone is talking about dominant and recessive genes, so I just want to clarify a couple things.

The way your body directly uses genes is as a blueprint to construct proteins. Your cells are always producing proteins from the genes in all your chromosomes. It has complex ways of regulating how much of each it produces, but your body doesn’t care what chromosome it’s coming from. Once an embryo is fertilized, there’s really no distinction between “mom” chromosomes or “dad” chromosomes, as far as the embryo and its protein machinery are concerned.

“Dominant” and “recessive” characterization is about how those proteins affect your body at the macro scale, not whether your body actually uses the gene and produces its proteins – it always does that. For example, brown hair is a dominant trait, and blonde is recessive. But this is because producing any amount of brown pigment will make your hair brown, regardless of what other pigments you’re making, simply because it’s darker. Literally the same as combining blonde and brown paint. It has nothing to do with whether the genes are actually being expressed – the brown hair gene doesn’t stop the blonde hair gene from making its pigments.

Perhaps “always-on display” is clearer? Keeps it from turning off when idle

Sure, but now you’re talking about running a physical simulation of neurons. Real neurons aren’t just electrical circuits. Not only do they evolve rapidly over time, they’re powerfully influenced by their chemical environment, which is controlled by your body’s other systems, and so on. These aren’t just minor factors, they’re central parts of how your brain works.

Yes, in principle, we can (and have, to some extent) run physical simulations of neurons down to the molecular resolution necessary to accomplish this. But the computational power required to do that is massively, like billions of times, more expensive than the “neural networks” we have today, which are really just us anthropomorphizing a bunch of matrix multiplication.

It’s simply not feasible to do this at a scale large enough to be useful, even with all the computation on Earth.

“uncommon” is an overstatement, you can get them pretty much anywhere that has pots and pans. It’s uncommon in that most people don’t bother owning one, not that they’re hard to get

In addition to what others said, the way you perceive light intensity is not linear. Between your eye adjusting to changing light levels and just the way your brains visual centers work, it’s closer to logarithmic. Indoor lighting at night probably feels like, what, 10% of the brightness of daylight? In reality it’s less than 1%, sometimes closer to 0.1%.

Legally, we adopted the metric system in the 70s, so more than “a few years” I’d say