Depending on the way it's modified, I think there's some environmental risk particularly for soil erosion and potentially cross breeding with non-modified crops.
I don't think these should stop us from making better food sources, but it does concern me because there isn't much corporate incentive to adequately test for these things.
Probably proper knife skills. I've always been pretty good with a knife, but I've been taking my time to really refine the skill as I do a lot of cooking for large groups so speed is extremely useful. I honestly learnt a lot of it indirectly by just watching how chefs use them, but for the theory and all that I started with Lan Lam's video on knife skills over at the America's Test Kitchen yt channel.
I'm about to be going to an event where I'll be cooking nearly a thousand meals a day for three days, so I'm going to be putting it to the test. The one nice thing is we'll have a team of volunteers to help with ingredient prep, so it should be okay but daunting none the less.
Once again, Ada just does the right thing and someone got mad about being called out. Glad we've blocked NCD now
I don't like commercial "AI" period.
That said, I did find some use for chatGPT last year. I had it explain to me some parts of Hawking's paper on black hole particle creation, this was only useful for this one case because Hawking had a habit of stating something is true without explaining it and often without providing useful references. For the record, chatGPT was not good at this task, but with enough prodding and steering I was eventually able to get it to explain some concepts well enough for my usage. I just needed to understand a topic, I definitely wasn't asking chatGPT to do any writing for me, most of what it spits out is flat out wrong.
I once spent a day trying to get it to solve a really basic QM problem, and it couldn't even keep the maths consistent from one line to another.
Inb4 robodebt 2.0
Hard agree, market solutions are bullshit designed to keep profits high and that's all.
For what it's worth, I don't really trust these ratings or put much value in them I just didn't see where they said it was leftist. The UN in general seems more centre left than anything else, but I'm sure one could make a reasonable argument for any centre-ish leanings, I'm not actually taking a position here because I don't care about the UN, beyond the fact that it sure isn't leftist.
Am I looking at the wrong thing? Because it says it's rated as centre left for me
Don't take my explanation for an endorsement, I've no love for DST either
It's about daylight savings, it provided more daylight to hunt in the evening, presumably because the day's other activities ended earlier.
This literally happened in reverse in Australia. Our current prime minister had previously attended rallies in support of Palestine and is on the record as having said "The Palestinians must be given their homeland" now that he's in government he's throwing around anti-Semitism claims at protestors and refuses to take action, even kicking a member of his party out for saying we need to recognise the state of Palestine
If anyone's wondering, I used to be a physicist and gravity was essentially my area of study, OP is right assuming an ideal system, and some of the counter arguments I've seen here are bizarre.
If this wasn't true, then gravity would be a constant acceleration all the time and everything would take the same amount of time to fall towards everything else (assuming constant starting distance).
You can introduce all the technicalities you want about how negligible the difference is between a bowling ball and a feather, and while you'd be right (well actually still wrong, this is an idealised case after all, you can still do the calculation and prove it to be true) you'd be missing the more interesting fact that OP has decided to share with you.
If you do the maths correctly, you should get a=G(m+M)/r^2 for the acceleration between the two, if m is the mass of the bowling ball or feather, you can see why increasing it would result in a larger acceleration. From there it's just a little integration to get the flight time. For the argument where the effect of the bowling ball/feather is negligible, that's apparent by making the approximation m+M≈M, but it is an approximation.
I could probably go ahead and work out what the corrections are under GR but I don't want to and they'd be pretty damn tiny.