Locally, yes, but the moisture that is accumulating previously evaporated and went somewhere else. What will the impact be there? Very hard to say.

By your logic all red wine and all white wine are exactly the same. They should all be labeled "red or white wine" and put in beige boxes and let the consumer guess which one they got.

Your personal opinion of what champagne costs should not factor whether they should have protected name origination. If I hate Brie cheese, they shouldn't exist then.

Champagne is a specific region in France that made a very specific alcoholic beverage based on wine.

They are not identical. They are similar at best. But in the modern world, can you make a new smartphone and call it a Pixel or an iPhone? Why not?

You asked if I was concerned and I said no. But your first retort is "not my problem." To summarize you care about my opinion only if I agree with you but try to gaslight me when I have a different opinion.

So in another post, directed to another person you made links which I could not see and comment on. But I am somehow supposed to know what they were. Why don't you link them here?

Citation needed.

Shifting the burden argument. Plants have had phytoestrogens forever. Forever. People have consumed them since forever. Your argument is that I must somehow prove to me they are safe instead of you proving they are dangerous.

Red herring argument. First of all your link goes nowhere. Second, what I posted again was has not been any studies that say they are bad. This is the opposite of tobacco where there are numerous studies that show that it was bad for you.

And what does this have to do with people who have been eating plants since before recorded history? So there was a Big Plant industry in the cavemen era keeping us from learning the truth by bribing Neaderthals? I guess when all you have is a hammer, everything must be a nail.

Let me see if I understand your sentence. A person facing heart bypass surgery was told he should practice moderation in his diet. And?

Your posts say otherwise. Part of science is the recognition of the limits of the research conclusions.

The words "proven" and "might" are the problems in your statement. These disruptors have not been proven to be cause problems. "Might" is the keyword until we know more.

So you are placing equal weight between even scientific research with your uneven observations and speculations.

I am not going to listen to anything you recommend. You are a random person on the Internet who has biased conclusions based on little evidence but their own personal observations. It is a lack of humility that you think your opinions means anything to anyone else.

Also, the hyperbole of "breaking inboxes" by sending a few hundred emails - what is this, 1993?

I'm sure their email server is more than capable of dealing with a few hundred thousand emails per day, and these assholes are just having a whinge that they someone made it easier to give electeds feedback about their stupid draconian crap that they justify "for the children" which may not even be technically feasible.

Sure. When you find something on this planet that is still in it's "natural state" after 200 years of human industrialization, let us know.

Why are you against choice? If people want their vegetables to look like meat, that is their choice. From the standpoint of someone who cooks a lot, form factor plays a role in the ease of cooking. Have you had friends over to watch a game? Some of them are vegetarians. They get veggie burgers. Others get beef burgers. One person cannot handle red meat but isn’t vegetarian. Chicken burger for them. The main difference in my preparation of the meal is which patty they get. Nothing else changes. But according to your world view, no one should get a choice and everyone including me should be inconvenienced because it seems to offend you even though it does not affect you.

I think it is a case that some studies have suggested a link, but like much science, people twisted that conclusion from "[A] might be a link to [B]” to "[A] definitely causes [B]."

No.

No they have not shown to do that. There have been studies that show that it might be a factor under certain conditions. For example some specific compounds like 8-prenynaringenin are present in low enough concentrations in most foods not to have negative effects. The population at highest risk for these compounds is heavy beer drinkers that favor hoppy beers. The key word being "might" not "is". Other compounds have no consensus about how much is detrimental with the emphasis that as of 2023, there are no definitive studies on humans but only animals.

That is essentially what happened. They didn't fire 35%, those 35% just transferred their reports to others and became ICs (Individual Contributors).

The 35% figure at Google is misleading. The vast majority of those people weren't pure managers they were software engineers who managed small teams as part of their duties while also doing productive technical work. A policy requiring a minimum of 5 direct reports for each manager was put in place, forcing all of those people to decide to either increase their management and cease doing significant technical work or cease being managers and focus entirely on technical work. Many chose the latter option, often quite happily (there is no additional pay or other concrete benefit to being a manager vs being an IC (individual contributor)). This partitioning of people who were in mixed roles into roles that were either managerial or technical provided most of the reduction in line and middle management.

Yes, I expect Alphabet would decline. I worked there for 15 years and understand the culture and motivations pretty well. Culturally, doing something like that would cut against the grain, hard. Pragmatically, they wouldn't like to oppose the administration but they'd get a lot more PR mileage out of leaking the request and publicly declaring their opposition than it would cost them.

How many vehicles do you need at 100% for your emergency edge case?

In no way is it reasonable to have some asshole you've never heard of make a decision to cause hardware you bought and paid for stop working because they aren't interested in maintaining their service offering any more.

Anyone looking far enough to the horizon knows that if you start selling a product like this, you have to keep the service on until the last one leaves the world, or someone decides it's not worth maintaining any more and perfectly working hardware goes to the landfill.

Fuck Logitech for not making a final release opening the API so people can continue to use this perfectly good hardware with other frameworks, such as Home Assistant.

PMI and agile are sure signs you have a serious micromanagement problem. With any luck this reversion to flatter hierarchies will also see the death of Jira, the micromanager's preferred nuclear weapon.

I love the bleating sound these micromangers are making now that they are being fired from their "cat herding" BS jobs. If they had the slightest clue, they would have long ago realized you don't manage programmers, you lead them. This means you don't "herd cats" you get a treat, and lead them to where they want to go anyway.

One good leader can "manage" the same number of people as a dozen or more PMI trained micromanagers.

A friend of mine who fired 100% of his managers and replaced them with a few leaders, said, "I could tell who was a manager, and who was a leader, simply because the managers were always complaining about stress and overwork; whereas the leaders were comfortable with how things were going, even when bad outside things impacted their projects. They had no problem with having their teams deal with any problems."