Yeah -- re-reading the comments on the original post about this it seems clear that people (myself including) made some pretty caustic assumptions about the motivations and ambitions of this company based on insufficient information. A good reminder that in fact =most= endeavours have real humans behind them and most people really do want to feel good about what they're doing. Brilliant kudos to these guys for the continued effort trying to make the best out of a bad situation.

Abhoring the state of commercial CAD options (Windows, excessive subscription fees, insignificant improvement cycles) I jumped right on testing this out. Experienced about 3x the clicks that I should to create a simple sketch and shape. Downloaded a STEP file from GrabCAD -- locked up FreeCAD on import. Kudos to them for reaching 1.0 but I'll check in again next year.

The bare minimum in a situation like this feels like the company takes posts the source code for everything. I mean it would hardly take any time and wouldn't really cost anything. It's probably naive to think someone would actually do something with it, but if I were in their shoes I'm not sure I would be able to sleep without at least feeling like I tried to do =something= good with a bad situation.

Suggesting that lower populations = increased deaths in combination with using very unreliable bird-watching data to start with raises a lot of questions about the judgement or skill of the authors of this study. I suspect that it quite likely =is= true that the net effect of fossil fuels on wildlife wildly surpasses the impact of windmills -- there's a lot of potential causes of the violent decrease in biodiversity in the last 100 years but fossil fuels has to be considered a likely contributor -- putting out a study like this just gives opponents to science-based approach to managing this crisis fodder.

I also really love the "but what abouts" that are popping out here by the opponents to renewable energy here when they actually believe this article -- well if it isn't the birds then what about the plastics in the blade? Awesome point! I trust that those same people are vocal advocates for eliminating single-use bags?

You're absolutely right about this -- in fact I think this is the most egregious case of this that I've seen in a while.
There are repeated concludions about causation when there is absolutely nothing in the study that suggests that at all.
The opportunity for a correlated (but not strictly tied) parameter to living in rental housing that is a causal factor to life expectancy is so wildly probable that it's wholly irresponsible to discuss this without at least hi-liting this strongly.

https://xkcd.com/552/

I got a Framework laptop (3:2 display) and could never go back to a higher-ratio screen.

It seems that 16:9 was the defacto ratio because it was more inline with media playback which was fine for TVs but was a stupid reason to standardize on a size for a device that you do anything meaningful with.

At the risk of sounding like I think everyone's use case is the same as mine ... OS UI tweaks are the most useless advancement. Doesn't everyone run just 4 or 5 application, most of which start automatically? Once I could pin things to the taskbar I stopped going into the Start menu for all but the most obscure things.
Feel free to re-arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, but I really couldn't care about 99.5% of the visible changes on Windows 11.
Does anyone?

Not so unrelated -- the founding team of Protonmail originally met working together @ CERN.

Why would you =want= a 10 year old distro? There are tonnes of up-to-date distros that will support old hardware just fine.

Well, that pretty much supports the TLD -- people who think they could've done better can't resist mentioning how "shitty" it was - even though the article mentions how petty and anachronistic that is.

I'm certainly not educated on this but it seems like declining population would be fantastic for the younger people who are on the winning side of the proportionally decreasing supply of people willing to make and do things. OK, so the freebies for the old folks might need to be curtailed a bit -- but those boomers have definitely not been short-changed on the whole-life ledger book and I doubt many of them will go hungry. Maybe giving up a few bon-bons in their twilight years might be appropriate penance for the environmental travesty that they've left us with.

I'm very close to giving up on humanity. What could possibly go wrong here? As a species we have an absolutely atrocious track record for predicting the negative effects of things like this -- how crazy would it be to unleash a bunch of aerosols into the environment confident that =this= time we definitely know everything about what we are doing? Ludicrous.

Agreed! If the theater-going experience is better enough to justify the cost premium then people will always want to go. If it isn't better than people won't choose it.
Why do either the director's or the studio's get to choose? The buying power of the public should decide.

Right now you couldn't pay me to go to a theater and I most definitely would like to see some new movies in the safety of my own home, thank you very much.

In 1986 I read a Scientific American article on sea level rise from icecap melting from global warming. It inspired me to do a high school science fair booth on the topic, well before it was topical.

I can't remember exactly what the timeline predictions were at the time but I do remember knowing that there was no chance that it my lifetime I would get a chance to witness even a piece of the excitement discussed in the SA article -- mass displacement, increased conflict, wars over resources, etc.

How naive we were so long ago!

I find myself giddy with renewed hope that my childhood dream of watching the fun may come to fruition!