Too bad, now this makes me feel sympathetic with this toxic UK project.

I guess that explains the huge interpersonal variation on PFAS excretion in feces. Everyone's liver excretes a small amount of PFAS in bile, some people have gut bacteria that absorb it, other people reabsorb the PFAS from the intestine.

Not sure this will be a big change for PFAS decontamination, as the PFAS must first be excreted by liver, and it seems it is not a very efficient process.

You face a statistical problem. Even if we find convergent studies concluding your habits give you a X% increase of dying before age N, that will not tell you when you will die. You could be lucky and get in the (100-X)% side. Or you could be unluncky and get a cancer at age N-20. Or you could even die from an unrelated reason, like being hit by a truck.

One still has to trust the code to actually implement what is advertised. And to be bug-free, too.

But we do not know if current GPU mitigations would protect against that new attack. Probably they would not.

Someone cited a Phoronix article. It explains that the GPU security mitigation were against Spectre attacks. This attack class is now addressed in the kernel and there is no need to take care of it in the GPU anymore.

But rotation is measured in rad/s, c is m/s, so how does it fits?

IMO, Mozilla strategic missteps was to spend time and money on things other than Firefox and Thunderbird development.

You said PTFE should be considered a PFAS, and I agree with you. But I do not want to loose my time on that point. The important point for me is the dangers of PTFE, whatever the classification we use for it.

As usual this kind of announcement should be readen while looking up crustal abundance of the required elements. molybdenum (Mo) and Tungsten (W) are note common, but not that scare. They are around the abundance level of uranium.

I understand US government knows about the issue, as the US patriot act gives it the same power

I did not, it was someone else. I am not interested into the semantic debate, the point for me is that PTFE can degrade into PFOA, which has a well-established a toxicity record (and is considered a PFAS by everyone).

Just my humble opinion: I think PFAS will outlive nuclear wastes. At least nuclear waste self-disintegrate. PFAS do not degrade without very harsh conditions.

That assumes you could avoid new PFAS contamination while you slowly excrete them. Since they are everywhere, that does not happen. Cohort studies show PFOA (and PFOS and other friends) contamination just increases with age.

The point is that PTFE does not have the toxic record of PFOA, its precursor and degradation byproduct. You could consider it as a safe PFAS, but unfortunately when you have PTFE, you probably also have trace of PFOA.