The fact that your instructions don't apply to my living situation or my pans is an indication that cast iron is a giant pain (not for everybody, but for a significant portion of people/pots).

I'm sure this is great advice for a combination of some pans, some ovens, and some cooktops. Of course I've tried all of this. It's not really productive to explain why each point doesn't work, but for example my big pan doesn't fit in what's considered a normal sized oven in my city.

This has not been my experience. One pan does not hold a seasoning. My other cast iron pan is fairly nonstick but sticky and unpleasant to touch, since too much effort goes into avoiding rust or degrading the seasoning. Plus it's so heavy that it's very hard to wash. My wrists aren't strong enough to deal with it on a regular basis. Lastly, when food does burn, it tends to ruin the seasoning because the residue needs to be scrubbed off. Lastly for real, it always burns food when used on induction cookers since the ring of heat is more focused than a flame and even a quite heavy cast iron pan conducts heat poorly.

I use laminated stainless steel pans with a cooking spray (which must contain lecithin as the nonstick agent). Is there any reason to use nonstick over laminated stainless steel? The teflon/aluminum pans are cheaper, but that doesn't necessarily justify the use of forever chemicals.

First of all, even my flashlight has a boost-buck converter that makes power draw constant. Your cell phone certainly has a switching converter. Moreover, you can't convert amp hours to watt hours with basic math. Or any math. There's not enough information. The easy way is to integrate the measure of voltage over time under constant current discharge. I suspect you know this, but in your eagerness to make Verge sound dumb, you misrepresented the physics.

Oh yeah, the chipsets I used were later series than that.

But they worked on Linux when the other manufacturers ranged from hit and miss to totally non-functional.

What was so bad about them anyway? I never had issues.

To be clear, these tools are considered weapons and it's totally inappropriate for a government to use them against, for example, journalists.

When I read about warfare, the country that sold the weapons is never part of the headline, except sometimes in the case of donations to Ukraine. So I think it may be more likely that you have a bone to pick than that the journalist is trying to hide things.

Does it, though? Does md ask the filesystem "this block is either 0xff or 0xef, please tell me which is correct"? Some internet searches lead me to believe that this scenario is unrecoverable, probably because md was designed before checksumming filesystems were popular.

Don't forget "Surgeons transplant Chinese genetically modified pig liver", which sounds like someone is saying it's a cheap clone of a genetically modified pig liver, which would be even more impressive.

I'm excited to hear about the Btrfs raid1 improvements. I was dismayed to learn that raid1 read operations are not shared among the two discs. Each process is given a disk to read from, so a copy operation would only read from one disk. Now with this experimental option enabled, contiguous data will be read in chunks from all disks in a round robin fashion. More info here:

https://www.phoronix.com/news/...

And to make a related argument, why would ethics not say we should make them enjoy serving humans? Because we're only going to create them to serve humans. Thus to maximize the amount of flourishing in the world, they need to serve humans and we need to make sure they enjoy it.

Of course that's assuming conscious beings all have enjoyment. I doubt they do. There are even human states of consciousness that don't have enjoyment or aversion.

Actually the study you linked does point to a possible benefit of cycling, if I'm reading it correctly. It would need to be studied much more though:

My apologies for jumping to conclusions. You were writing for a general audience and I didn't know whether "cholesterol" in your comments referred to LDL, TC, or a more general measure that we don't test for. And thanks for explaining how statins affect the body's balance of cholesterol. This is indeed something doctors don't bother mentioning to patients.

It sounds like this is an issue I should pay attention to, and in the mean time see whether I can get excellent lipid levels with more dietary changes and less medication. I also wonder whether diet/supplementation could counteract or prevent negative brain effects (fish and phosphatidylserine?), but I doubt that has been studied.

Do you follow any doctors or researchers that publish for the public at a detailed level? I'd like to learn more but as I said, I don't trust myself to evaluate the studies directly. I find Peter Attia's stuff just over the line between interesting and dry, which is probably the right balance for me.

About your "fog lifting", I would have thought that these issues are chronic, not acute. Did you interpret what happened as your brain rapidly repairing issues, or that the meds caused you acute issues? The former possibility makes me wish someone would study the effects of cycling statins--if for no other reason than to rule out a potential good therapy.

Is that actually a thing? Because my understanding is that the body can't run out of cholesterol. The cells synthesize what they need. It also seems like you are conflating cholesterol and lipoproteins. The way you're using the terms (in your multiple posts) is inconsistent.

I don't understand enough of the relevant biology to interpret cardiology research, and it doesn't sound like you do either.

Haven't you heard about what happens to people that publish science on populations and intelligence? Why would it be different for another topic that looks prejudicial if you squint hard enough at it?