Indeed. I recall student group projects for wave and tidal power generation. It was some interesting stuff, some similar to this buoy concept, others underwater sails, and some reminiscent of paddlewheels.

Challenges were not so much the power generation, but transfer to land at scale. and storm survival. Looks like this folk have it figured out, having survived 18.5 meter waves. And in operation 3 years by now. Kudos to them.

Another interesting power generation effort id taking place in the Bay of Fundy. With huge tidal swings there is a huge amount of energy to be harvested. My guess is their main challenge is the extreme tide variations, at one place 15 meters. Most low/high variation is around 10 meters. So we have to deal with bare ground at different times of day, and the rotating time of low and high tide. But they figure they can extract 2500 MW of the 8500 MW kinetic energy there. https://natural-resources.cana...

Another avenue is the "mean girl" effect. This is a big one. Presumed friends or sometimes enemies that love drama.

Actual court case. A woman was suing a supposed friend. What happened was the plaintiff had admitted she had a "work crush" on her boss. Even named him (a friend group, so she didn't feel awkward admitting it.) Of course, the drama loving friends encouraged her to act on her attraction to him, she had said "No!" but one of the friends who had a large Instagram following said "Why don't we see what my followers think? I'll anonmyze everything"

But she "forgot" to anonymize the Bosses name. and the company. Aa lot of drama happened, ending with the company HR calling in and firing her because her boss was married. Caused a kerfuffle. But oh, much entertainment was to be had. Plaintiff lost the suit, because she exposed herself in the friend group, then allowed the Instagram lady to put out everything on the Internet.

Okay, you're continually stating that I am incorrect. Let's roll

https://www.npr.org/sections/t....

In 1967, the Sugar Research Foundation wanted to counter claims that Sugar consumption's role in heart disease. So they funded research by Harvard scientist that supported their claim. The conclusion of the research that sugar was innocent, and that Americans fat consumption was the proximate cause.

This was published in teh New England journal of medicine. They have spent 50 years trying to support this claim. Point is, if People consumed less fat, they would be able to increase their sugar consumption by 33 percent.

Then in the 1960's the Sugar industry was concerned that sugar was at best, an undesirable substitute for other carbohydrates. So they funded their own research - shades of tobacco. One of their researchers was a Harvard professor who was also on the Sugar Research Foundation. Said research suggested not only that sugar was not a coronary health problem, but claimed incompetence and methodology flaws on all the research that noted sugar related coronary issues.

That's the leadup to my thesis. Mine is that there was a lot of bullshit in the old suggested amounts of food types in the old nutrition guides, in fair part based on bullshit research like the Sugar industry, this assigned the problems to fat, not sugar and by extension other simple carbs. https://idealhealthmd.com/2025...

Here are two food pyramids. 1992 and present. They look quite different to me. https://realfood.gov/ I do side with the new one, but need your explanation how there is no - or very little - change. Who am I to believe, you, or the data and my lying eyes?

Your thesis appears to suggest that nutritional guidelines have not changed. Can you support that when presented with the old and the new, which to my eyes look a lot different. Explain why I am wrong, that there has been no change as you quite definitely stated.

You are correct about the type of people. IIRC you are in another country, but here in the US, corporate interests hijacked the food pyramid, and so many took the advice to go heavy on the simple carbs, limit the proteins, and as little fat as possible, while chow down on that candy. But other than my short lived vegetarian debacle, I don't listen to them.

Back story - I was raised in a poor family, we grew a lot of our own food, canned much, and the extended family would go together and buy in bulk for the rest.

The family in my case was Italian on my mother's side, and Eastern European on my father's. It was only after leaving home it occurred to me we were eating something close to Mediterranean diet with an Eastern European twist. Turns out we were eating better than the wealthy people. Wife and I have picked up canning again, as well as curing meats. Keeps the tradition alive, and damn - it is good.

CEO of a 501(c)3 corporation. Part of that job was required social media presence. The main task was providing information on our "mission" and interactions with people. Educational and technical in nature, not unlike the "learn to code" effort. Teaching classes in digital RF comms is a big part.

But Facebook being Facebook, relatives and friends found me. Being an experimentalist by nature, and noting distinct personality shifts and intensity shifts, with people I looked into the reasons for that. That was apart from my tasking.

This is separate from what I do in semi retirement. It's still technical, but at present my paid work is electromagnetic communications and interference mitigation.

Nutritional needs of humans haven't changed much since we became humans. But not only people but corporate interests always conspire to either push things that will make them money, or in the case of individuals, push some agenda. Sometimes it is "Everything you are doing is wrong" or "I've found the secret to health" or of course, ethical matters.

I understand some of this, but what is your claim that Amazon is messing with people's minds?

A million times this. After I had to be on Facebook for my work, I figured out their algorithms. I'll use real life examples. I introduced a friend to Facebook. A really decent guy. Conservative, but not overly.

Within a year, he was far right Maga on steroids.

My female relatives:

They were all the stereotype Liberal White Women. Over time, they became raging womanists, to the point if you dared to express any other opinion but theirs, you were subjected to claims that you were misogynist, an example of patriarchal rap culture woman abuser. My wife was on the same group chat, and it's been tough keeping her from the same leanings. Only thing that saved her is she was abused a lot by women (note, men get the blame, but try being a slender attractive woman in a high position)

So okay - what's the common denominator for two groups largely at each other's throats? If you go to FB and see an interesting article or story and click on it, the algorithm stores that, and starts serving you up a little more. Some of those stories or articles might be a little further toward your interest. And people tend to believe what they read. So each new push of the algorithm takes you further. The further you accept, the further it will take you into the fringes.

So now, my female relatives are basket cases, my friend is so far right he is almost unrecognizable.

As an example I shared a store piece from the Babylon Bee that said something like "Woman suspects her husband is using AI when he started sending thoughtful loving replies to her texts." Funny, kinda addresses one of the light hearted versions of male vs female interactions.

The results? my feed was inundated with posts from women who very definitely hate all men. What the actual hell? I had to go through and stop those. Now my feed is getting weird.

There actually are some decent groups on FB if you can get rid of the political bullshit. Meanwhile many people are ruined by it.

Oh, having that fried and crisped up sounds awesome.

Random tip: I do home made bacon. The nitrates do not cure the fat - you have to have enough salt.

Random tip: We see "uncured bacon" in the grocery stores - that is an out and out lie. It usually has celery juice in it. Celery is high in nitrates. So are many other veggies. So it is cured, and those who wish to eliminate all nitrates are out of luck - I guess they have to eat bread and a bit of fruit.

Gross.

For those who pay attention. I look at it like the admonitions against protein versus carbs in previous food pyramids, along with a condemnation of fats. The skids greased by your friendly sugar industry and some corrupt researchers. https://www.npr.org/sections/t...

And the results? Obesity and bad health outcomes.

Something seemed off to me. I looked at my parent's generation. According to the high carb/low protein, almost no fat crowd they should have all been dead by 50. Fat, bloated dead. According to that pyramid, they were 180 degrees out of phase with "what people should eat." Yet there wasn't much overweight, they were pretty healthy, although tobacco took its toll on many.

My generation could struggle a bit with weight. Today, there is general obesity in many quarters. It isn't the only reason, but the sugar industry's efforts have taken its toll.

Now to your point - yes, there were nutritionists who preached against this, with a message of moderation in things, that fat was necessary in one's diet, and that overconsumption of carbs could lead to appetite disregulation. I do know that back in the mid 80's, I tried a vegetarian diet. (lacto-ovarian) What a mess. Turns out some of us are not designed for a prey diet. Wrecked my metabolism. I stopped after 6 months, and took 6 more months before I returned to normal.

But those nutritionists who preached moderation and a balanced diet were considered stuck in old school, and being left behind. So who to trust?

Turns out it was the ones who weren't beholden to the sugar industry.

Then again, what isn't deadly in extreme quantities?

There is a common fallacy that there are no positive outcomes to alcohol consumption. Your statement shows what I mean when I wrote about "No safe level of alcohol consumption" That's likely your narrative. But don't feel alone, people are prone to absolutes. Some things do have no safe level, but present day granularity in measurements tends to tell us there isn't much of anything we can eliminate entirely. Just don't go around consuming lead acetate. Protip, getting drunk on ethanol is a stupid and bad choice. That doesn't make having a glass of wine or a beer with dinner the road to an early demise.

As a person who has access to every academic paper in the open literature and quite a lot not in it, there is a non-zero chance that I read and understand a lot more than your erroneous assumption about my reading and comprehension chops. Your suspicions are wrong and ill founded, perhaps by starting out with a conclusion, then arranging your facts to fit that conclusion. Dunno, don't care a lot. Don't feel badly though - that is an extremely common thing.

Oh, I like that. Fits me to a T

A somewhat related matter. I had a similar thing happen with my father when he ended up dehydrated. His doctor told me that a lot of older men with prostate issues intentionally drink very little water for obvious reasons. Then they become dehydrated, which doesn't help their health at all.

Yeah, water intoxication is a real thing. And if you drink a lot of water after sweating a lot, but don't recharge your electrolytes you can really feel off. It's sort of ironic that in a world where people are told to back off the salt, some of us need to take steps to make sure we get enough.

Never been able to handle wine, tends to give me stomachache. So I stick to gentler things like cheap Tequila.