Comment Re:well (Score 1) 106
No, the executive tells the civil service what it needs to do, but the civil service is wholly independent.
No, the executive tells the civil service what it needs to do, but the civil service is wholly independent.
I mean, from a horticultural perspective, there is some potential to gain more of other nutrients, in that if you have more energy, you can develop a larger root system, or generally more effectively, better feed mycorrhizal associations (fungal hyphae are much finer than root hairs, so can get into smaller cracks, and fungi can "acid mine" nutrients out of mineral grains - as an example, here's a microscopic image showing what they did to a garnet)
That said, yeah, in general if you can provide more energy, you expect the storage of "calories" to grow much faster than the acquisition of other minerals. Also, it's important to note that while more CO2 is generally good for most plants, more heat, or greater periods of drought (land dries out faster, monsoon belts spread) and flooding (atmosphere holds more moisture, monsoon belts spread) are not. In regards to heat as well, there's a lot of details. First off, though we commonly don't think about it, heat management in plants is critical. Their proteins are designed for function within an optimal temperature range, and to maintain it, they have to cool themselves down with transpiration, creating more water stress. Also it's worth noting that C3 plants (most plants) fundamentally don't tolerate heat as well as C4 or CAM plants (there's work to engineer C4 into some common agricultural crops... it's frankly amazing to me that they're getting some success, as it's not a trivial change).
BTW, the reason that plants grow better with more CO2 isn't what most people might think. The TL/DR is that the protein that sequesters CO2 so that (using ATP and NADPH from photosynthesis) - RuBisCo (the most abundant protein on Earth, something that has been evolving for billions of years) frankly sucks at its job. Something like 20-25% of the time (at normal CO2 levels), instead of binding with CO2, it binds with O2 instead ("photorespiration"), which means not only does it not sequester a carbon, but the plant has to *give up a carbon* to regenerate the RuBisCo. This is disastrous in terms of energy efficiency. And as a side effect, you also have to keep the stomata open more, which means more water loss. But as you increase the CO2 levels, the ratio between binding CO2 and binding O2 improves, and photorespiration waste drops. C4 plants "fix" this problem by instead of having RuBisCo directly bind CO2, they first bind CO2 into malate (with high selectivity), then the malate transports into bundle sheath cells, the CO2 is re-released, and THEN - in a high-CO2 environment - RuBisCo takes it up. This reduces photorespiration, but also introduces some more wasteful chemical conversions. (CAM plants to even further by storing malate inside vacuules - at the cost of even more energy - so that they can store it up during the night, and then use it during the day, which - although even more wasteful - lets them keep their stomata closed during the day to conserve water)
(BTW, there are some microbes that have developed a more efficient RuBisCo, but it's proving challenging to engineer it into higher plants)
They're ovens that are faster to preheat. Which shortens the cooking time of meals that are mostly pre-prepared, which is what most people eat (if you're preparing a meal from scratch, usually prep work takes up the preheating time)
The point is that people who willingly contributed to the enshittification of the internet have no ground to stand no to complain about the enshittification of the internet.
Hi lovelies! Welcome back to my little corner of the comment section! I am so incredibly excited to share this comment with you today. It is a family favorite, passed down through generations of posters, and it is honestly a total game-changer for weeknight reading. But before we get to the actual text of my opinion on this article, I just have to share a little story about my journey with digital content.
[ JUMP TO COMMENT ] (Link does not work)
It was a crisp autumn morning in 1998. The leaves were turning that beautiful shade of red, and the sound of dial-up modems was in the air. My grandmother (rest in peace, Nana!) used to sit me on her knee and say, "Sweetie, one day you’re going to read an article about Artificial Intelligence scraping content, and you’re going to need the perfect text-based response to go with it." She was so right.
I remember the way the sunlight hit the CRT monitor—it’s an unforgettable memory for me. Just like the way the aroma of roasting garlic fills a kitchen, the warmth of a flame war fills the soul. My hubby, who is a huge tech enthusiast (and my biggest taste-tester!), always says that the key to a good comment is the texture. You want it to be crunchy on the outside but soft and savory on the inside.
Why You Will LOVE This Comment
It’s 100% Organic: No LLMs were used in the making of this opinion!
Quick & Easy: Once you scroll past 4,000 words, it takes seconds to read!
Kid-Friendly: My kiddos beg for this comment every Tuesday night!
Freezer Friendly: You can save this HTML and reheat it for later debates.
I know what you're thinking. "User:Rei, do I really need another opinion on copyright law and the extinction of the ad-supported web?" Trust me, you do. This isn't just any opinion. This is a curated opinion.
The Secret Ingredient
A lot of people think the secret to a good Slashdot post is the insight. But actually? It’s the SEO optimization. When I went to Tuscany last summer to study under a master poster, I learned that the old ways are the best. We hand-kneaded our sentences for hours. It was exhausting, but so rewarding. It really made me appreciate the artisanal nature of the internet before Google's AI started making "Frankenstein" summaries.
Speaking of Frankenstein, isn't it funny how Mary Shelley really understood the human condition? Frankenstein tells the story of Victor Frankenstein, a young scientist who creates a sapient creature in an unorthodox scientific experiment that involved putting it together with different body parts. Shelley started writing the story when she was 18 and staying in Bath,[2] and the first edition was published anonymously in London on 1 January 1818, when she was 20. Her name first appeared in the second edition, which was published in Paris in 1821.
Shelley travelled through Europe in 1815, moving along the river Rhine in Germany, and stopping in Gernsheim, 17 kilometres (11 mi) away from Frankenstein Castle, where, about a century earlier, Johann Konrad Dippel, an alchemist, had engaged in experiments.[3][4][5] She then journeyed to the region of Geneva, Switzerland, where much of the story takes place. Galvanism and occult ideas were topics of conversation for her companions, particularly for her lover and future husband Percy Bysshe Shelley.
In 1816 —at the suggestion of Lord Byron— Mary, Percy, John Polidori and Byron himself, each agreed to try writing a ghost story.[6] After thinking for days, Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein after imagining a scientist who created life and was horrified by what he had made.[7] The novel was first published anonymously in 1818, and in 1831, a revised edition was published under Mary Shelley's name. This version included significant stylistic revisions, a new preface describing the story's conception, and a more explicitly moral tone.[8]
Frankenstein is one of the best-known works of English literature. Infused with elements of the Gothic novel and the Romantic movement, it has had a considerable influence on literature and on popular culture, spawning a complete genre of horror stories, films, and plays. Since the publication of the novel, the name Frankenstein has often been used to refer to the monster.[9][10][11]
It reminds me of this one time I was trying to bake a sourdough loaf while simultaneously debugging a Python script...
(Please disable AdBlock to view this anecdote about my parrot, Malcolm)
Equipment You Will Need
A keyboard (mechanical preferred, Cherry MX Blue for that crunch!)
A monitor
Internet connection
Patience (lots of it!)
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I substitute the sarcasm for genuine concern?
You can, but the result might be a little dry. I recommend sticking to the recipe!
How long does this comment keep?
It stays fresh in the archives for about 2 weeks before the link rot sets in.
Okay, I know you guys are hungry for the content! I see you in the comments section on Instagram asking, "Where is the comment? Why do I have to read about your grandmother?" I hear you! I just want to make sure you have all the context you need to succeed.
So, without further ado, here is the step-by-step guide to what I think about this article.
THE COMMENT
If the
100% this. Recipe sites jumped hard on the SEO bandwagon, and became so hated for it that "having to scroll down 15 pages to actually find the recipe" became the butt of a joke.
You do not appear to understand what a republic or a democracy is, so I'll ignore the last sentence.
"Independent" does not mean unaccountable to the people. The President is independent of Congress, and vice versa, but both are accountable to the people. Well, the current president doesn't seem to think so, but legally he is.
The civil service is not a part of the executive but is a co-equal branch.
You are correct. In principle, presidents have no authority whatsoever to dictate how an agency runs. The executive branch should have zero authority over the civil service, which is intended to constitute a fourth co-equal branch of government.
In the US, in principle, the status of the civil service as co-equal to, and independent of, the executive should be added to the Constitution and enshrined in law for good measure. Not that that would help much with the current SCOTUS, but a Constitutional change might possibly persuade the current government that absolute authoritatian control is not as popular as Trump thinks.
That is the idea that, in Britain, entities like the NHS and the BBC have operated under. Charters specify the responsibilties and duties, and guarantee the funding needed to provide these, but the organisation is (supposed) to carry these out wholly independently of the government of the day.
It actually worked quite well for some time, but has been under increasing pressure and subject to increasing government sabotage over the past 20-25 years.
It's also the idea behind science/engineering research funding bodies the world over. These should direct funding for grant proposals not on political whim or popularity but on the basis of what is actually needed. Again, though, it does get sabotaged a fair bit.
Exactly how you'd mitigate this is unclear, many governments have - after all - the leading talent in manipulation, corruption, and kickbacks. But presumably, strategies can be devised to weaken political influence.
That may explain it. I have a Qrevo S, which is from 2024, while yours is from 2022. The only thing that it ever gets stuck at is one spot where, from under the couch, it can see out the ground-level window, and get stuck between the couch and window ledge (not actually stuck, just confused), because the LiDAR sees out the window. And I fixed that just by setting a small exclusion zone there. It never "gets lost" - maybe your house has some vast open spaces that it can't handle? But the LiDAR seems to see pretty far. The only other issues I've had are things like where I'll have a loose cord on the floor or some large piece of debris or whatnot, and even then, it's usually good at not getting stock on them. I'm also impressed with how well it deals with doors vs. a Roomba - my Roomba used to always get itself locked in rooms by accidentally closing doors after it entered, while the Roborock really tries to avoid ever touching them.
The Qrevo S has actually rotating mops, and they do a superb job with the floor. Spotless. My robot has the hardest mopping job in the world, too - it has to clean under my parrot's cage, and he poops off the edge onto a plastic mat under it
I've never had to contact support - hopefully I don't need to
although map editing sucks and it often gets lost and can't properly reset its position. It needs to be rescued pretty often which is a major fail.
That's very distinctly not my experience. What version do you have?
A real vacuum cleaner just about maxes out a standard residential 120v 15a circuit, as anyone who remembers the incandescent bulb era can attest to. A circuit with a few lamps shared with a vacuum cleaner could easily end with you flipping a breaker or replacing a blown fuse.
When you look at the absolutely tiny lithium ion pack these robo-vacs come with,
...
Sitting on my kitchen table right now is a drone pack. It's 57,5Wh, smaller the batteries of most modern Roombas. It's 50C - thus it can output up to 2,9kW. And there's even higher packs available than that. Lithium ion cells can handle some truly high power outputs. It's *energy*, not *power*, that is their limitation. Run a pack at 50C and it'll be empty in a bit over a minute. That said, on hard floor surfaces there is absolutely no reason why you should be drawing more than 300-400W or so, and you can get by with well less than that. High powers are for like shag carpeting and the like. Also, the head matters more than the power (though of course contribute) - for a hard floor, for example, a fluffy roller head is ideal.
Pet hair has never been an issue for me with robots. My long hair always is. It's way longer than any pet's.
Yeah, my Roborock has rotating mops, and I can say with 100% certainty, I haven't lived in a cleaner house since I moved out of my OCD mother's place as a teen. You could eat off that floor.
You know, the difference between this company and the Titanic is that the Titanic had paying customers.