Skip Navigation

Posts
13
Comments
745
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Electric heating is 100% efficient in general, as in 100% of the energy used is converted to thermal energy.

    Yeah, I was careful to specify transferring heat to the pan.

    Luckily a ridiculous amount of research has been done to show:

    Ok I am convinced now 😆. I'm easy to convince if you have data. I am surprised though, I have used all three and induction is by far the quickest to heat. I can boil a giant pot of water in a few minutes, so I am a bit surprised that the difference between electric and induction is not that big.

    I guess gas is fast to heat because it stores a ridiculous amount of energy so it can waste plenty and still be quick.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I am not convinced an electric stovetop is any more efficient at transferring heat to the pan than gas is, unless you are using induction which the majority of electric hobs will not be.

    Edit: I have been convinced now, see below

  • This is pretty much my life at work. "Here's how AI can do something with 95% accuracy, beating out the alternate rule based method that only delivers a 100% accuracy rate".

  • To be clear and so people don't get the wrong idea, Graham Linehan is the creator of The IT Crowd, he's not in this meme.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Well I am a step closer to the answer. Here a similar photo taken on the Artemis II mission with the same identifying features: https://images.nasa.gov/details/art002e009212

    In this fully illuminated view of the Moon, the near side (the hemisphere we see from Earth), is visible on the right. It is identifiable by the dark splotches that cover its surface. These are ancient lava flows from a time early in the Moon’s history when it was volcanically active. The large crater west of the lava flows is Orientale basin, a nearly 600-mile-wide crater that straddles the Moon’s near and far sides. Orientale's left half is not visible from Earth, but in this image we have a full view of the crater. Everything to the left of the crater is the far side, the hemisphere we don’t get to see from Earth because the Moon rotates on its axis at the same rate that it orbits round us.

    Long story short, like 3/4 of what is in this photo is the near side of the moon.

    As a side note, the coloured image on the left of the OP appears to be this image that reddit detectives have decided was edited by OP. No one has found that coloured version on any NASA release.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I'm half confused. Light source - the sun, just take it when the moon is in it's new moon phase (side facing earth is dark, side facing sun is light).

    But the moon is tidally locked to earth, we always see the same side, so what is taking the photo?

    Artemis II visited while the far side was dark, so I guess this is an old tweet otherwise why would NASA be releasing it now?

    Happy to be told I'm dumb if I got something wrong...

  • There is already plenty of empirical evidence to support the claims of the harms of social media, but in spite of this, change is glacial.

    I think at one point you could make the same argument about medicines. The problem is that politicians are appointed with a popularity contest.

    I don't remember all the arguments of the article, but when you think about it, the harms of social media are medical. It's possible that we could expand the scope of the current medicine approval boards to include algorithms, with their job not being to understand the algorithm but to understand the research on mental health.

    I don't have all the answers, but I do think it's an idea worth exploring.

  • pay me!

    Jump
  • I was meeting with my team the other day, and the conversation turned to our mortgages. My boss: ah yes, the reason we are all here.

  • In my view social media is probably not the problem, but the algorithms they use that are designed to be addictive and manipulative.

    I saw an article once arguing that the algorithms should be regulated in a similar way to medicine. Give some base ingredients they can use freely (e.g. sort by newest first), then require any others to run studies to prove they are not harmful.

    There would be an expert board that approves or declines the new algorithm in the same way medicines are approved today (the important bit being that they are experts, not politicians making the decision).

  • Lemmy is a different kind of platform. Twitter wasn't for me, but I never clicked with Mastodon either. Some people like the microblog format but I just never got it, or maybe I never worked out how to use it probably.

  • It does, yeah. If you aren't averse to cloudflare then it's a great option.

    From memory I think it's limited to http/https traffic, but that's normally not an issue, just have all your services behind a reverse proxy.

  • IMO the header should stay at the top as part of the page. I know where it is, I'll scroll up to it if I need to.

    Like you, I find a header appearing and hiding quite difficult in specific circumstances.

  • They only credit for months you do no searches at all, if you do one you pay for the full month, but it's a nice touch. Personally I can't think of a situation where I'd do no searches in a month!

    For something as important as search, paying $5 or $10 a month seems entirely reasonable to me. I've been a Kagi user ever since their unlimited plan dropped to $10 a month when they reached enough users that they could do that.

  • Awesome, thank you!

  • Damn that lools better than the recipe I have. Care to share the recipe?

  • You are paying for these services one way or another. But no one says you have to pay $10 for each service.

  • Yes, it shouldn't be needed

    My view is that is should be needed. Advertising is a bad business model, I'd much prefer paying for a service I used. I think we should all get more comfortable paying for the sites we use.

  • Which morning?