Triggered is pretty simple. You see something and can't help but go off. This should be obvious but sometimes people are too busy being triggered to actually think

Guess what? That's how public fora work, anyone can reply, and you were talking to everyone if you didn't send some kind of private message

Edge is shit. Sometimes I have to restart it just to get it to accept clicks. And this is on a corporate machine, with no weird hacks.

It's not surprising and the roots of the problem go back to NT4. In 3.51, there were three separate memory spaces in NT: kernel, user, and GDI where graphics happened. In NT4 they merged kernel and GDI, and we began to get blue screen crashes caused by graphics drivers. These remained the primary cause of blue screens right up until the driver model changed for Vista. Browsers both came into being and got GPU acceleration in between those times, so they had the opportunity to expose bad graphics drivers.

While this is true, being the subject of an experiment to see what happens when you do that is not something most people would choose for themselves. It's not *irrational* to be concerned. Absence of evidence on a largely unexplored question like microplastic infiltration in human bodies is not the moral equivalent of absence of evidence in an extensively studied question like a vaccine-autism link.

That's not a problem for recognizing microplastics as a hazard, because we already recognize silicates as a hazard. Thanks for your support!

Compared to the rest of the costs of the systems which use it, the helium cost is not a big problem. It's less than the labor cost of keeping the machine ready for use. An MRI uses over 100 MWh a year, the machine costs millions to start with, the personnel cost is hundreds per hour... The machine uses roughly 100-200 liters of helium, which is now $30-50/liter. So $3000 to $10000 for a full fill. Boil-off rates range from 0 to 0.2%/day. A refill occurs every 6-24 months. So we're looking at a max of about $20000/year for the helium, or about 33 1/3 days of personnel costs.

(These numbers were pulled from various obviously AI-authored pieces on MRI refill costs, so they might be fairly bullshit-ish, but since multiple articles were around the same numbers I've used them here anyway.)

By the same token, management clearly either didn't understand or was unwilling to sign off on a meaningful replacement program. For that you don't just install and pray, you study what each department's users are actually doing on a daily basis and then you test the new software to determine a) whether it can actually do those things or not and b) how they are done if so. Part of that for example is to check all the templates being used to see if they will work, which they clearly didn't do here.

Office is literally designed to be hard to emulate, the so-called "standards" are bad jokes which aren't actually standards because you can't actually follow them and get an proper result. They're malicious. Not taking this into account when attempting migration is incompetent.

As I look around I see a mixture of things, some things which would be very difficult to replace, and some things which would be very easy to replace, and some things where they would still need some plastic but they could use a lot less. The rest could be made of wood or metal. Mostly I propose using aluminum because it's extremely recyclable.

Don't be obtuse, companies provide training for office applications through contracted training portals. I've "attended" video trainings on Excel and Word. If they changed to LO tomorrow I'd be fine, but I'd still have to figure out how to do those things again. And some users would not be fine.

Something did change. We stopped stockpiling a reserve, and that reserve has been exhausted. That's two things.

This is so offensively stupid and wrong that it makes me wonder if you are a paid shill for the plastics industry.

Being able to look stuff up on the internet isn't great, it's a basic minimum for being considered an internet user, at which you fail. There are toddlers with more competence than you. (Which explains Slashdot moderation.)

Office doesn't do standards, really. Microsoft's standard OOXML contains numerous statements which basically say "do what Word does here" so the software Microsoft Word is basically part of the standard. In a sane world this would mean that Microsoft would be forced to open source it, but we don't live there.

Oh, you want me to google Köppen classification maps? Here you go. Gee, what a shock, they're exactly what I described!

As for your paper's offhanded sloppy remark (California contains a lot of Mediterranean climate, but not the specific pistachio growing centres), your paper says:

Fig. 1. Pistachio cultivation in California (year 2022) , showing counties with the largest planted area: Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, Madera, and Merced. Own elaboration with data from: DWR (2023).

Gee, I wonder, what's the typical annual precipitation in the lowlands in Kern, Kings, Tulare, Fresno, Madera, and Merced counties? Let's just start with Kern, which alone produces 1/3rd of the state's entire crop: Hey Google, what's the typical annual precipitation in Kern Country? Let's see your top hit

Water sources in Kern County
Precipitation in Bakersfield averages 6.49 inches per year. It’s a very dry climate.

6.49 inches per year. That's a desert (sub-10 inches). Do I need to walk you through the rest? Oh wait, I already fucking did that.

Here, let's sum up the whole thread: Hey AI, who's right in this thread?

Rei is overwhelmingly correct.

While Rei made one minor typographical error regarding Köppen climate codes, their factual claims regarding California geography, pistachio cultivation, precipitation levels, climate classification rules, and water usage are scientifically sound. Conversely, DamnOregonian’s rebuttals rely on fundamental misunderstandings of how climate classifications work, California's geography, and where pistachio agriculture takes place.

1. Where Pistachios Are Grown & Whether It Is a Desert

DamnOregonian’s claim: Pistachios are not grown in the desert, and the San Joaquin Valley is a Mediterranean climate where crops get "ample water."

Rei’s claim: Pistachios are overwhelmingly grown in the Tulare Basin lowlands (southern San Joaquin Valley), which receives 5–8 inches of rain annually—well within the standard definition of a desert.

The Facts:

California produces over 95% of U.S. pistachios[1][2][3]. The vast majority of production is concentrated in Kern, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and Madera counties[3][4][5]. Kern County alone produces over a third of the state’s total crop.

These lowlands receive between 5 and 8 inches of precipitation per year[6] (Bakersfield averages ~6.5 inches[7], Lost Hills ~6.6 inches, and Kettleman City ~7.5 inches). For comparison, Phoenix, Arizona receives ~7.2 inches.

In biology and geography, this region is formally recognized as the San Joaquin Desert (established by Germano et al., 2011, and recognized by the USGS and conservation agencies)[8][9][10].

Without massive state and federal irrigation projects (the Central Valley Project, State Water Project, and groundwater pumping)[6][11][12], these orchards could not survive on local precipitation.

2. The Köppen Climate Classification Blunder

DamnOregonian's central argument relies on a flawed reading of the Köppen climate classification system:

DamnOregonian quoted Wikipedia’s description of Csa:
"Regions with this form of a Mediterranean climate experience average monthly temperatures in excess of 22.0 C... Point out where they mention rainfall."

Why DamnOregonian is wrong:

Köppen classifications are hierarchical, and Group B (Dry/Arid climates) takes precedence over Group C (Temperate/Mediterranean climates)[13].

To even consider whether a region belongs in Group C (Csa), the region must first fail the Group B aridity test[13].

The aridity threshold (P th) is calculated using mean annual temperature and the seasonality of precipitation[13][14]. Because the Central Valley gets most of its precipitation during winter, Köppen’s threshold formula is: P th =20×T Celsius

For Bakersfield (mean annual temperature ~18.5 C / 65.3 F), the threshold for aridity is 370 mm370 mm (~14.6 inches). Under Köppen, if an area receives less than half of the aridity threshold (P3. Native Range of Pistachios

Rei’s point: Pistachios (Pistacia vera) are native to the arid plateaus and steppes of Central Asia, northeastern Iran, and northern Afghanistan.

The Facts: Rei is correct. The modern commercial cultivar used throughout California (the "Kerman" cultivar) was collected in 1929 from the desert-adjacent Iranian Plateau by USDA botanist William E. Whitehouse[4][21]. The tree naturally adapted to thrive in hot, dry, rainless summers and survive on deep taproots in arid soils[4][21].

4. Rei's Only Minor Mistake

Rei wrote:

"southern San Joaquin Valley lowlands are a mix of BWh (Hot desert climate) and CWh (Cold desert climate)."

In the Köppen system, a cold desert climate is abbreviated BWk, not CWh[15][22]. Cwa and Cwb are temperate monsoon climates[14][22]. This was clearly a slip of the keyboard, as Rei correctly provided the definition ("Cold desert climate") in parentheses.

Conclusion

Rei is correct. The heart of California’s pistachio belt lies in the Tulare Basin / southern San Joaquin Valley, an arid desert and steppe landscape receiving only 5–8 inches of rain per year[6]. DamnOregonian's claim that this region is "not a desert" and that Köppen Mediterranean climates do not depend on rainfall criteria represents a complete misunderstanding of both climatology and local geography.
Sources
help
americanpistachios.org
agmrc.org
agwestfc.com
ca.gov
farmonaut.com
wikipedia.org
encountertravel.com.au
figshare.com
scienceforconservation.org
kglmeridian.com
nature.org
capitolweekly.net
climatezonemap.com
hardymaps.com
oregonstate.education
wikipedia.org
plantmaps.com
figshare.com
wikipedia.org
noaa.gov
californiacurated.com
worldbank.org

"Get fucked" yourself. Facts will continue to remain facts whether you like them or not. Pistachios are grown in the desert, specifically, the San Joaquin Desert, in the Tulare basin lowlands, in the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley.