Maybe chickpeas are expensive where you live, or maybe you miscalculated. Either way, take a look at my numbers for comparison.

We can get a 3.63kg bag of chickpeas here for $7.49 (CAD). Assuming you fulfill all your Calorie and protein needs from chickpeas alone (2500 Calories and 150g protein per day), it comes out to about $600/year. That’s $1.64/day. In order to be $10/day, you’d have to pay 6x as much for your chickpeas, so that same 3.63kg bag would have to cost $45.50.

More variety in your diet is likely to always be superior to less. That goes for both kids and adults. The trouble with younger kids is that deficiencies can impact their development and have more severe long term consequences, and they’re also less capable of seeking out foods to fill that gap.

Having come from the world of C++, this was a huge step up.

In theory, the value they create is in handling all the home maintenance. Of course, many of them don’t do their jobs in practice.

I mean, this is how businesses work in general. If you don’t buy their products/services, then they wouldn’t be able to continue providing them.

I understand that we’re trying to draw attention to exploitative landlords, but if anyone can afford to keep their property regardless of whether or not you pay rent, it’s the exploitative ones.

we can only do that in our fiction

At present, yes. The hypothetical is in the future, possibly in one where we’ve developed interstellar travel and we can be the ones visiting the alien planet.

since they are by definition far beyond our technology

How so? Aliens aren’t going to suddenly come into existence and have super-human technology in that same instant.

Before I started adblocking, I’d get “relevant” ads in that I can understand how someone of my age/gender might like it, but they’re never things I’d purchase myself. I just want a mostly empty home with as little visual stimulation as possible, and buying more stuff doesn’t help with that.

So yeah, I’m definitely saying “ads don’t work for me”, but it’s probably only because these companies refuse to make ads targeted to people like me.

In the context of the American general public, a healthy burger would require a very different ratio of meat to bun to veggies, at which point most people probably wouldn’t call it a burger anymore.

There are so many different types of tofu and different ways to prepare them that all taste vastly different. That stuff is basically a blank canvas.

there are traits exhibited by conscious entities which we don’t observe in those which lack consciousness.

Implying we have a way of determining whether an entity is conscious or not. That’s the entire point of contention here.

It wins in the sense that you still have access to the software and code, and you have the option to either hire someone new to maintain it or switch to something else. Closed source proprietary software only leaves you with the latter choice.

An important component of the cost to consider is how long we expect a company to support a piece of software, and how much it would cost to migrate everything when they drop support. FOSS wins in this regard, especially if you can get a support contact with the devs.

Traffic dynamics are really interesting. Even after you clear the obstruction, the traffic jam remains and becomes a “ghost jam” that propagates backwards down the road until it eventually fizzles out.

Toss the crust

• Pro: No additional negative effect on your enjoyment of the food or your body
• Pro: compost and let the plants eat it
• Con: You cease to be a grown ass man

Eat the crust

• Con: Negative enjoyment
• Con: Extra Calorie consumed. More strain on the medical system.

If anything, eating the crust would be the “wasteful” decision. I’m sure if it were possible to get the same pizza without crust, all of these people would jump on that chance.

The smaller the pizza, the more crust there is relative to non-crust.

Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good

I wouldn’t say frozen milk is particularly far into processed territory.

Because the rules of the English language are the same for everybody. You don’t just get to go around telling people they have to use a different ruleset for you or when they are around you. It’s pretentious as fuck to expect people to cater their use of the language like that. That’s exactly what names are for.

Certainly, the rules of the English language exist for a reason. For me, that’s to communicate and convey information. If you unilaterally decide to change the language, then your words can fail to communicate what you intend. Although, I don’t think that applies here. Correct me if you think otherwise.

If anything, it seems like the “new” pronoun rules you see today are people trying to enforce the standard English rules. He/she communicates someone’s gender presentation. If you refer to “him” between someone who looks masculine versus feminine, then you’ll assume that the “him” refers to the one that’s masculine-presenting. That’s how English usually works, and it works this way to allow us more efficient communication. Of course, this doesn’t work 100% of the time because there are many axes and a gradient on each of these axes between what we consider masculine or feminine. What would the English language dictate when you’re near one extreme on some axes and the other extreme on others? I don’t believe we have any well defined and useful rules for this besides the preference of the person it’s referring to. Again, do correct me if I get anything wrong.

Looks like you’re getting a lot of people riled up here.

I’m curious about why you find it so objectionable for someone to choose their pronouns but are fine with name changes.