The JVM was far less efficient in 2000 and few dozen MB of RAM overhead for a program running on it was a big cost. Today the JVM performance is excellent and the memory and startup overhead is insignificant. I'm typing this from a computer that's seven years old, and the JVM "Hello World" starts in 115 ms, vs. 15ms in the same hardware on C.

I think Ceylon will fade into oblivion just because it's so late to the space. I like the language features, I think it could be a better Kotlin.

Yup, I'll just stop eating while still hungry every day from now until I'm dead. No problem.

Every fat person that lost weight on a diet and gained it back tried that strategy and had it fail. That's more than 99% of us.

I have a tip for you: to live forever, just avoid death. Can I mock you for knowing that and not being immortal?

I suspect the biggest correlation between obesity and depression comes because despite the efforts of the Body Acceptance movement, fat-shaming is common and fat people are usually (per the original discussion) the villains, the idiots, or the comic relief in popular media. Plus, you read and hear (incorrectly) that your risk of dying from obesity-related causes is astronomically high. Again, large population research indicates that the numbers in the news about 300,000+ or 800,000+ obesity-related deaths per year are wrong. When you control for activity levels and diet, obesity is a mortality risk but not nearly on the levels stated.

I think your other points stand, though.

So what kind of diet do you have, then? Many carbs that aren't sugars, like pasta and bread, get converted rapidly to sugar during digestion. So there isn't that much difference between, for example, a plate of pasta alfredo and three donuts.

Right, but that thermodynamic truth is as useful as the statement that "wealth comes from spending less than you earn". The devil is in the details.

If you cut any fat person's food intake enough, they will start to lose weight. That's not in dispute due to thermodynamics. But short of locking them in a cage for the rest of their life and controlling their food intake, the most likely outcome is that their hunger gets the better of them - maybe in six hours, maybe in six years - and they regain the weight. Weight Watchers statistics are that on average across all of their tens of millions of members over decades of time there is 5% fat loss in the first six months and a rebound back to a 2.5% fat loss after three years. So a 300 pound person, on average, will be 285 after a year on Weight Watchers and 292.5 after three years.

People who lose more than 10% of their body fat and keep the fat off by ongoing dietary restrictions exist, but I'm not aware of any peer reviewed research from any source that indicates they are more than 10% of dieters when you examine trends in a three year or longer time window. That includes plain old calorie restriction, vegan diets, Atkins and Protein Power diets, Paleo, South Beach, Zone, you name it.

So the thermodynamic facts are true but useless.

As far as I understand it, LineageOS has individual images for each hardware skew. This PostmarketOS project has the idealistic but possibly impractical goal of having one core universal package and then one unique package per hardware skew.

So in terms of architecture, PostmarketOS would be an improvement. But it's not clear to me that it could ever be done.

Android and iOS mobile apps have three changes over desktop.

1. Designed for a touch interface.
2. Designed to auto-save and switch to lower power or background off mode as directed by the OS and then transparently resume when returned to the foreground. I don't know how well iOS uses that feature for its apps. Earlier versions of Androids were pretty awful at it, and programs like "Advanced Task Killer" were needed to keep the phone from grinding to a crawl. Android 5.x and newer uses it effectively, you can have a 2GB device and switch between forty apps rapidly without manually closing any of them, and the phone keeps right on going at full speed because the OS pauses and closes things in the background. Similar APIs could be written for Linux and Windows, but nobody has (or they have but they're ignored by 98% of Windows and Linux application developers).
3. Designed so that untrusted apps can be installed with restricted permissions. This kind of thing has always been possible on Windows and especially on Linux (or other Unix flavors) but sandboxes like AppImage, Snappy, and Flatpak didn't have the same focus when iOS and Android launched as they do today.

So you're understating the value iOS and Android bring to mobile and overstating how easy it would be to do similar things on traditional Linux or Windows.

I'm not defending the walled gardens, the locked bootloaders, or the proprietary drivers and firmware required for everything from the GPS to the cell modems to the wifi chips. Those are all anti-freedom, anti-privacy, anti-consumer. But the idea of a popular smartphone operating system running plain Linux or Windows 7 is even more of an impossible dream than Replicant.us, WebOS, Meego, etc...

Is the mobile market getting to this point or are their going to be some twist and turns that will make LTS OS a wast of time, because we will be using out of date and useless phones.

I would argue we reached the point of diminishing returns on hardware upgrades two or three years ago. A full HD screen, 2GB of RAM, and a three year old multi-core ARM processor runs Android 7.x just fine. Upgrades are nice, but most people that don't have a six figure income would prefer to have phones that keep working and keep getting security fixes for five years or longer.

But the industry is trying to ride the planned obsolescence wagon as long as possible. In addition to the lack of software updates, we have a rarity of removable storage and greater rarity of removable batteries.

Increased appetite is not a problem? You try eating but stopping while you're still hungry for years and tell me how it works out for you.

Thyroid affects metabolism. If it makes a significant difference to your basic metabolic rate, that can have a huge impact on weight. So before he got thyroid treatment he was eating, say, 200 calories a day more than his body was burning and he gradually ballooned up to 260. Then on the medication his appetite didn't change but his metabolism did and the same food intake was 300 below what he used. Fast forward a year, and that's enough for him to slim down. That's especially true if the thyroid problems were making him tired all of the time and their fix made it easier for him to exercise or just plain walk around more.

My mother's particular autoimmune disorder is Poly Myositis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

You solved the problem! We're cured! All fat people in the world will be thin! All hail the insight of Shadow of Eternity.

If telling fat people to eat less worked, there never would have been any fat people. Out of every million of us fatties, I bet you'd have a hard time finding even 3 that genuinely enjoy being fat. We hate it. That doesn't mean eating less than what hunger dictates for the rest of our lives is practical. Diets/lifestyle changes/portion size adjustments fail, statistically, far more often than they succeed.

I'm trying to eat healthy and exercise daily because it's good for my health. I've given up on slimming down. All my other diet/lifestyle changes/Weight Watchers/Atkins/Dr. Dean Ornish/Paleo/whatever failed, and losing and gaining weight in cycles is worse for heart health and bone density than staying fat. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time for me to jiggle like a mountain of Jello while I do fifteen burpees.

I had some joint problems, and I found the Super Slow/Power of 10/Slow Burn workout routines allowed me to do strength training without hurting them. All three use similar kinds of workouts. They also have other nonsense (the Slow Burn fitness guru is anti-vaccine, the Super Slow inventor has some wacky conspiracy theories about cancer research, etc...), and you won't gain big muscles no matter how you try. Or at least, I didn't. I did Super Slow for years and it never aggravated my bad shoulder and bad knee but I wasn't any stronger in month 27 than I was at the beginning of month 3. But the exercise itself was designed for people with arthritis and osteoporosis, so it may be worth investigating.

Good luck either way.

Not all people in the Body Positive movement are insulting people that are thinner than us. Yes, there are trolls. Just like some thin people troll fat people. But the whole point is Body Positive for all sizes.

But further, to the specific points of diet and exercise - in my 30s I was diagnosed with severe sleep apnea (pauses in your breathing while you sleep, which can lead to fatigue all day, mood problems, poor concentration, and heart problems). For my entire life before that diagnosis, if I did a twenty minute strenuous workout Monday I would need an extra two or three hours of sleep for the next three or four days. I talked to my doctor about it a few times but he blew me off. After I got my sleep apnea diagnosis and got used to my Continuous Positive Air Pressure (CPAP) machine to assist with breathing while I sleep, I could do a strenuous workout on Monday and then need no extra sleep. If I had gotten this diagnosis at age 15 instead of 35, the amount of exercise I would have gotten in those twenty years would have been wildly different. That whole time I was lucky to manage once a week, because I would have problems staying awake at work and at home.

My mother was 150 pounds at age 48. Then she developed an auto-immune disorder that attacked her lung function. The only way to keep her lungs from deteriorating was to put her on a crazy high dose of cortisone steroids. One of the most common side effects of cortisone steroids is weight gain. On top of that, the cortisone steroids aren't completely effective so her lung capacity is below 50% of the normal level. So between the medicine and the added difficulty exercising, she gained over 100 pounds.

One of my college roommates was very fat. During senior year of college he was diagnosed with a thyroid problem and placed on prescription medication to regulate his hormone levels. He lost 70 pounds in a year without even trying - no change to his diet, no change to his exercise routine. Thyroid hormones regulate your metabolism.

My point is, there are plenty of lazy people of all sizes. But you can't just look at a fat person and be confident that laziness is the complete cause of that particular person's obesity.

https://www.nap.edu/read/13089...

"In 1999, Allison and colleagues calculated that in 1991, between 280,000 and 325,000 deaths of U.S. adults were due to overweight and obesity (Allison et al., 1999a, 1999b). Six years later, Mokdad and colleagues announced that overweight and obesity (together with physical inactivity) had been responsible for 365,000 excess deaths among U.S. adults in 2000, making it the second-leading preventable cause of death in the United States, behind only smoking (Mokdad et al., 2005)."

"Those numbers, which were publicized widely, now appear likely to have been major overestimates. For example, one study published shortly after the Mokdad et al. (2005) article that used more recent data and took into account how mortality risk varies by age yielded much smaller numbers (Flegal et al., 2005). According to that study, obesity, defined as a BMI of 30 or above, caused approximately 112,000 excess deaths among U.S. adults in 2000, while being overweight had a protective effect and led to 86,000 fewer deaths than would have been expected if all of those people had had a BMI in the normal range. The net result was that overweight and obesity together resulted in an excess of 26,000 deaths in 2000, the authors concluded, which was less than a tenth of the earlier estimate."

Body Mass Index (BMI) and life expectancy follow a curve, and the curve peak - the longest lifespans on average - are for BMI between 27 and 28, which is qualified as overweight. An individual athlete can have BMI 28 and ultra low body fat, but these were population studies and across populations BMI 27 or 28 carries lots of fat on average.

But quoting research and statistics like that cuts into profits for the diet industry and takes away all the fun of mocking the fatties, so it doesn't get much press attention.

Discrimination is only a problem in fields that pay well. Law, medicine, technology, research.

You don't see anybody screaming that more white men and women should be employed as farm workers in California, and the fact that they aren't is racial discrimination. The only people that take those jobs are people who can't find anything better.

Again, I'm not asking for obese leads, love interests, or action heroes. I'm just asking for obese side characters that aren't all either incompetent or evil.

Women generally find slimmer, more muscular men more attractive. So there's a visual component to attraction for them too. Steve Buscemi is wildly popular, but that face of his prevented him from ever being cast as a romantic lead. Magic Mike and Magic Mike XXL were very successful, and I don't think that was driven by gays especially since none of the sex scenes in the films were between guys.

Women's looks were more important than men's looks a century ago, because a century ago the important thing about a man was his earning potential and the important thing about a woman was her looks and her ability to cook and clean. We're moving towards equality of the sexes in most ways, but I think the fact most people (men and women) place more emphasis on how good women look than they do on how men look is a legacy of that.

If you think attractive men don't get a lot of the benefits that attractive women get, you're crazy. I had a college buddy on steroids that would sit in the center of campus in jeans and a tight muscle-shirt. He had a different girl most nights of the week. They didn't stop to talk to him because they saw his personality lounging on the bench.