I’m willing to bet the reaction here would be different (not from everyone, but in aggregate) if the headline was “Sourceforge just erased years of free software history” or “Google Scholar just erased years of scientific history” because they’d just taken down all old repos or search results for old papers without any notice.
> “Google Scholar just erased years of scientific history”
Sure the tone would be different, but anyone who was totally shocked by Google pulling a service is definitely an idiot. How much worse could Google's reputation be at this point. It's Google. They pull stuff.
That it happened on any particular day? Yeah, that is surprising. What are the odds. Could have been any day of any year.
That it happened? Not a surprise. If it matters to you, you should have done something.
An Amerisleep.com survey of more than 1,200 Americans revealed that 37 percent used vacation days in the past year just to rest.
I’d like to see the wording of this survey.
If it’s something like ‘did you use vacation time to rest?’, it seems to me that it’s likely to always have got a large percentage of ‘yes’ answers. Isn’t that partly what vacation has always been for?
I pay no attention to anything that comes from a survey. It's meaningless.
It's just so lazy. Look at average hours which went to a high of 35 hours in 2021 (probably peak WFH), and now down to 34. This is all likely noise, but there's nothing to suggest Americans are overworked and burnt out. There are a ton of other measures, like annual hours worked, etc and none of them show an increase in the amount Americans work. Maybe people don't like their jobs, but it says more about expectations and attitude than anything else.
You hear this stuff all the time from commentators and politicians. I've heard hours worked is lower because "everyone has multiple jobs", and you look it up and it's 5% and pretty steady from the past 25 years
The erosion of the spending value of the dollar (aka the amount of inflation from post-covid government spending), and therefore most people's salaries probably have more effect on people's feelings about their salary and how far it's not going, which in turn negatively impacts feelings about work and overall stress.
Why work if you can't even afford a house or healthy groceries for yourself or your family?
>The erosion of the spending value of the dollar (aka the amount of inflation from post-covid government spending), and therefore most people's salaries probably have more effect on people's feelings about their salary and how far it's not going, which in turn negatively impacts feelings about work and overall stress.
Even though inflation shot up post covid, by all official statistics wage growth has outpaced it. Therefore to imply that this behavior is as a result of people earning less in real terms is incorrect.
People are getting fired and are having to rely on gig work to live. It's a reporting gimmick by both administrations to convince us the economy is doing better when it hasn't.
I think maybe they mean something like "questionnaire poll survey" vs "data reporting survey" (i.e. the former comes from asking random people a hopefully well phrased question and seeing who responds, the latter comes from many businesses just feeding payroll data up to the government to be analysed directly), but even then... a good questionnaire poll is nothing to ignore.
I can understand it after some deciphering, but I think that’s only because I already know quicksort. I’d be interested in seeing if anyone new to sorting algorithms finds it illuminating.
Then again, maybe that’s not important to the author - it is a pretty funny illustration to those in the know.
I'm a programmer (after a fashion) but I don't know how quicksort works.
This is how I understand it after reading these instructiöns, without looking up any further explanation:
1. Choose a random element as the 'center' point of the sort
2. That element defines the maximum 'height' (value)
3. Anything that is larger than that value, is moved to the right side of the 'center'
4. Anything that is smaller than that value, is moved to the left side of the center. After this, the array is partially sorted.
5. The sorting process is repeated on both 'sides' independently, picking a new random center element and so on
What isn't clear, is how often the process needs to be repeated, or when the algorithm 'knows' that the sorting has been finished - surely it can't be just three iterations?
By now I've already looked up how the algorithm actually works, but the above is what I got out of the illustration :)
Also, to save any further puzzling: In practice the very fast sort you use, even if it is labelled "Quicksort" probably doesn't actually do this "all the way down" even though that's the strict algorithm.
They'll have a highly optimised small sort and use that whenever sorting very small things. So e.g. IPN Sort the Rust stdlib unstable sort will do this for 16 items, even though for a big slice it'd quick sort them by default, once it's down to say 10 items they're going to the specialised small sort.
Any serious "fast" sort in 2025 will be a hybrid, using several of these classic sorting algortihms, plus other insights to produce the overall best solution to their problem on modern hardware.
HUML is a simple, strict, serialization language for documents, datasets, and configuration. It prioritizes strict form for human-readability. It looks like YAML, but tries to avoid its complexity, ambiguity, and pitfalls.
I tried to do this (buy an affordable priced, reasonably accurate meter) and, after probably after reading the same articles as you, reached the conclusion that there are no meters that are accurate and affordable.
So many seem to rely on automatic ‘calibration’ - which just seems to consist of “let’s assume the lowest sensor readings of the last while correlate to baseline atmospheric CO2”.
For a meter that’s never taken outside, this is obviously going to mean it’s reading too low all the time after a few ‘calibration’ cycles. And, worse, it's likely to be more wrong in less well ventilated spaces.
By design. If it was actually offensive Fox would be playing it non-stop. The offense has been excavated from inside an implication of a phrase in a nested clause in a sentence saying something unrelated.
Kimmel said (as part of an argument that republicans were playing politics by pointing fingers) that republicans were trying to prove that Robinson was not a republican , from which you have to infer that Kimmel meant to say Robinson was a republican.
I wouldn’t want to be the lawyer who one day will have to argue how a device with USB C and a rechargeable battery can be classified as “disposable”.
I thought the point of making them like this was that they technically are reusable, so they can sell them (to people who for some reason keep buying them and throwing them away!) in places where disposable vapes are banned.
I'm confused by why anybody would buy one of these when entirely reusable versions exist, but then vaping seems unwise to me in general except as a way to quit tobacco.
Vaping nicotine doesn't seem that bad to me. AFAICT the dangers outside simple addictiveness are moderate lung irritation and cardiovascular effects, but no strong evidence of cancer caused by vaping alone - far better than cigarettes, and still better than an equivalent drinking problem.
Vaping causes inflammation, nicotine suppresses the immune system (which is probably pretty bad news for fighting any other diseases), and nicotine cessation has been linked with an increase in development of autoimmune disorders in the 12-24 month period after quitting.
I had elevated white blood cells counts and I developed an autoimmune condition a few months after quitting vaping. I had good health record leading up to it and no family history of any autoimmune disorders. White blood cells eventually normalized but autoimmune is forever, although it's under control and I'm lucky that it was caught early.
In the final ~4 years of vaping I didn't use any flavorings either, just 70/30 mix of VG/PG and nicotine.
It's not terrible as far as vices go, much less harmful than the alternatives, but it's definitely not as harmless as I thought going in. I wish I hadn't started and went for the ADHD assessment right away instead of subconsciously self-medicating with nicotine.
> linked with an increase in development of autoimmune disorders in the 12-24 month period after quitting
No shit, I had no idea.
That explains a lot. I quit smoking (well, the first time I tried to quit) when I was 19 (2 years smoking). 3 months later I was in the hospital with sclerosing mesenteritis, a rare disorder for an older person but baffling and way out of left-field for a 19 year old with no prior history autoimmune issues. We only got a diagnosis after full exploratory surgery that earned me a six inch incision scar on my stomach.
Word. I quit nicotine and it triggered auto immune response, I got celiac disease.
Never touched it ever again and I had to stop eating like a normal person. No more fast food for the rest of my life.
I don't think adequate studies have taken a look into the long term effects of all the solvents and oils they use aside from the nicotine. Intuitively, this just seems like a terrible idea putting non-water-soluble vapors into your lungs but I am definitely not a doctor.
It's not exactly a wild list. You can make your own mint vape liquid at home by combining 1 part vegetable glycerin with 1 part glycol, dissolving nicotine salt to the desired concentration (most dangerous part due to nicotine's toxicity, suggest getting it pre-dissolved in either one or both of the above), then dissolving menthol in to taste.
Don't get me wrong: it's not good for you, but it's a lot less bad for you than cigarettes, and it's not some great mystery as to what's in it.
This is why to me it’s so damn disappointing to me that vaping is targeted so forcefully by the various scolds in the “regulate everything” camp when smoking isn’t yet eradicated. Things like banning flavor and stuff. They want it to be as unpleasant as tobacco, which reduces the likelihood of people switching from tobacco to vaping, killing many of those smokers as a way to “save” teens from taking up an overall not-very-dangerous habit.
I vaped for around 8 years, about 4 years with typical flavorings and the last 4 years unflavored. IME unflavored vaping really isn't that bad, I accidentally switched to it because I ran out of flavoring one time and after a few days I didn't really miss them anymore so I just stopped using them.
I would compare it to people who drink soda all day, they can't fathom how people can drink "boring" plain water all day and they have a really hard time switching, but people who are used to drinking water find it as refreshing and satisfying as anything.
I think these flavorings cause more harm by luring young people to start vaping than they help smokers by luring them away from cigarettes. In an ideal world adults would be allowed to vape whatever they want, and teens wouldn't be able to get their hands on vapes in any capacity, but clearly that's not working so I think that flavor bans are a decent compromise.
I don't buy the argument that flavor bans will make teens go back to smoking. Cigarettes taste awful, they make you smell terrible, they irritate your lungs far more, they're far more expensive. If I was a teen I would still pick up unflavored vaping over cigarette smoking any time, but I'd be less likely to get into vaping without the flavorings.
> A third of UK teenagers who vape will go on to start smoking tobacco, research shows, meaning they are as likely to smoke as their peers were in the 1970s.
> The findings suggest that e-cigarettes are increasingly acting as a “gateway” to nicotine cigarettes for children, undermining falling rates of teen smoking over the past 50 years.
As an adult with a vaping habit, I can see how that happens. If you're a kid, and thus have unstable access to nicotine vapes (because they're illegal for you to buy), you'll be highly motivated to get your nicotine fix from something if your source of vape liquid dries up. Since cigarettes are more common, the result is a kid being likely to smoke sometimes.
Same thing happens to me (albeit far, far less frequently) when I'm out at the bars with my friends until 2am when I discover I'm out of juice. Since vape shops tend to keep normal retail hours, I'm limited on getting my fix from whatever the 7/11 is selling. If that's Marlboro reds, I'm probably going to smoke a cigarette or two.
Key difference between it being a "gateway drug" and not is the fact that I'll end up throwing away that pack the next day when I can refill my vape. Because smoking sucks in comparison. Not only on health grounds (not a huge concern for most nicotine addicts), but on basic grounds like "making you smell like shit", "hurting your throat", "tasting bad", and "not having the oppurtunity to be used nearly as frequently".
Maybe I'm just an old geeser but when I went back to grad school I was absolutely shocked at how many people vaped, and it seemed to have been because they started smoking flavored vapes. People would go to a party, either in high school or college, and the party would be permeated by some sweet smell. Curious kids/people would investigate, try vaping, and eventually get their own, becoming addicted.
As far as I can tell, banning flavored vapes has had a significant impact on reducing vaping/smoking new users, which is the ultimate goal. People who are currently addicted should primarily be motivated to quit, not find better tasting alternatives
Counter-point: For someone who's used to smoking or vaping, the craving to "take a puff" can be a very strong, maybe stronger than the chemical dependence on nicotine itself.
I noticed that in myself when I was trying to quit, vaping nicotine-free liquids helped my cravings more than nicotine itself. It didn't help the physical withdrawal symptoms but it mysteriously stopped the cravings for a while.
i have owned lots. they taste better than most permanent vapes. ive tried the whole buy all the best components and perfect juices etc with various tanks of different flavours. disposables just work and taste good, no leaks. they also have a logical end point like a pack of cigarettes. Its nice to switch flavour more frequently, and the packet/vape body colours pressed deep monkey brain buttons for fruit etc
Yeah, the sweetener they put in the disposables is like crack. If a liquid could replicate it then the switch to reusable would be a no brainer, but I never found one. Alas I switched to nicotine gum and haven’t looked back.
50mg/ml disposable vape liquid tasting better than the freebase stuff is a crazy take. I haven't met a single person who was there before the modern disposable trash that doesn't think it's markedly worse. It tastes like gas station vape juice circa 2012.
Good reusable systems have been around for 10 years now. Disposables sell well because people like to think that they can quit whenever they want without having to abandon an investment (never mind that the investment in a refillable system is literally cheaper than a single disposable vape in many cases).
gas station vape juice circa 2012 seems like a touch exaggerated. ive extensively researched making my permanent vape setup taste as good, and its down to the amount and type of sweetener used which doesnt seem to be available.
ive even bought the brand of liquid owned by the disposable company with the same branding. it's just not quite there.
you also have to accept the market for them, according to what you have said above shouldnt exist, but it does
I did the math and Juul was 47x more expensive than the liquids (this is in Canada). Then I switched to the juice vapes, and finally to kick the juice vaping I picked up pipe tobacco. Pipe tobacco is way cheaper than cigs nevermind vapes, the highest quality, and tastes incredibly good (also, you can also get that "first cigarette headrush" every time if you like by inhaling, works every time).
I used to love the smell of my Grandfather's pipe smoke. I still enjoy the occasional 2nd-hand smell of a rollup. Is pipe tobacco different to rollies?
Substantially. It is way more coarse, usually much more moist as well. Tends to be more “pure” tobacco with less additives, though I’m sure that’s not universal. I know somebody who does not smoke but buys it to keep in cabinets and various drawers because they love the smell. I must admit I am partial to the smell as well.
What the other guy said. Do yourself a favour and pickup some Mr. B's Crème brûlée just to smell it. It's like the best thing I've ever smelt even outside of tobacco. It's not an acquired taste where if you say something smells amazing it's implied that it's within the range of something objectively nasty.
Because reusable versions are a hassle. Cleaning, Charging, Changing Batteries, Changing liquid, etc. Whereas with reusable, well, you just puff and worry about nothing. Which is why people vape in the first place :)
Reasonable people already reused single-use bags. Trashcan liners, dog walk bags, cat scoop bags, etc.
Having recently been reminded that it used to be common to see eviscerated VHS tapes by roads, I've been reminded that we'll always have people who litter.
Many single use bags come with holes in them or develop them after a single trip hauling boxes with sharp corners home. Making the plastic a little thicker makes it last many times longer.
I’m not sure what your point is: because one type of litter is reduced, it doesn’t matter because people still litter in other ways?
In every place where plastic bags are banned, there’s a dramatic and obvious reduction in the amount of them clogging up trees, roads, fields, waterways, etc. If people need them for other purposes, they can buy them, while everyone else who doesn’t need them, doesn’t.
Yep, every so often I remember staring out the window on the highway in the car as a kid and seeing single use bags snagged on fences or trees pretty much anywhere inaccessible or not routinely cleaned.
I also catch it on B roll footage in movies or shows from the 90s/2000s a lot. It’s a specific type of visual blight I rarely ever see after those ultra flimsy single use bags that could be carried dozens of miles on a gentle breeze were eliminated.
(This children's book was written basically at the tail end of the era where seeing a bag flying could conjure the imagination)
The majority of people reuse those bags, they're pretty great actually. Most people I know have slightly more expensive bags made out of fabric though.
Not here. Standing in line at stores like target that have them I see maybe 1/20 people checking out in front of me bring in reused disposable sacks, while 15/20 leave with new ones. Certainly not enough reuse to justify the extra thickness.
We get most of our groceries through Drive Up services, where you place an order the day before and they bring the groceries to your car. Through a combination of a new disability, and a new baby in our family, the convenience is well worth the price (free).
But now every week we have more and more reusable bags that we can't find any use for, so we recycle a bunch each quarter. (And even that is questionable, when they are covered in impossible-to-remove stickers.)
You've misunderstood the assignment if you don't reuse those, they are perfectly fine for that and will last a long time. Just have one in your bag or car. I've even reused paper bags for more than half a year since the ban.
They do, but they still don’t make it back to the stores enough, and nobody has 16 wastebaskets to line every week. Also the old ones were just as suitable for wastebasket duty.
The bag laws have done nothing but increase the consumption of plastic, since stores still go through nearly as many, but they’re 5x thicker now.
> The current data provided by the main retailers for the reporting year 2024 to 2025 shows a reduction of almost 98% on the annual number of single-use carrier bags sold since the charge was introduced. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/carrier-bag-charg...
5x thicker is still a net win.
And it was less about reducing plastic consumption and more about reducing plastic pollution. 1000 tonnes of plastic in a landfill and incinerators (because the heavier bags are more likely to be reused even just as bin bags) is better than 200 tonnes blowing around and decaying into environmental microplastics.
In terms of total plastic consumption, 8 billion plastic bags (what the UK used before the charge) is maybe between 20000 and 40000 tonnes depending on thickness. Which is pretty minor on the scale of plastic usage considering how much plastic crap and packaging was and still is used.
The only time I even get one of those things is if I forget my regular bag or I buy too much stuff to fit. That happens like once a month.
Why are you going into the store empty handed and coming out with 16 plastic bags?
Not everyone is you. 16 is mild hyperbole, but I'm not even speaking normatively on what people should do. I'm speaking about what people do do. I'll stipulate that everyone including me should always keep at least 10 bags in my car so that I can do about 2 typical shopping trips even if I forget to put them back in the car. And we should always remember to carry them in. But that isn't happening with the current hilariously poor incentives in place (50 measly cents to buy 5 bags and no bag deposit either.)
I predict that if you spend 10 minutes observing the checkouts in your supermarket you'll see exactly what I see: At least 75% of people buying new plastic bags for the transaction, and zero people depositing bags into the special bag recycling bin at the store - which in the US is basically the only place this type of plastic is even accepted for recycling.
And again, these bags appear to be 3-5x as thick as the old bags, so the bag law is a huge win for Big Plastic who sells more plastic than they used to, and it mostly goes into the landfill.
The solutions:
• Admit this is a failed policy
• Everyone everywhere stops being imperfect, forgetful and lazy -- 100% of the time.
California is still hoping for the latter to pan out!
If you have a family and a grocery store in walking distance you can do it easily; I would hit 16 if I forgot my shopping bag - which I do on occasion.
Growing up, smoking was quite common. A lot can change in 20-30 years, so I'm cautiously optimistic that maybe vaping will eventually become as socially unacceptable as smoking.
The coil is part of the pod and therefore user-replaceable. The point of a pod system is to keep the coil and liquid in a self-contained system, which practically eliminates the risk of liquid leaks. All of these quasi-disposable vapes with replaceable pods and a charging port can be re-used hundreds of times.
I don't know why people dispose of the whole thing rather than just changing the pod, but at least it's a boon for electronics hobbyists.
If you're in the EU/UK the WEEE directive means anywhere selling them should take them back like-for-like to be directed into the correct waste stream. (they get paid some of the deposit on them to do so)
I would be more fine with disposable vapes like this if almost all of them were recovered somehow, for the amount it subsidises production of Li-ion batteries.
That's the theory. I practice, even in famously recycling-obsessed Germany, it's impossible to return electronics in places that are required to accept them, even two years after that law passed. The staff is really confused when you try.
Theoretically a high enough deposit could probably “fix the problem.” Like, if the empty was worth a $25 deposit most people would 100% take them back to the store. It would be annoying for people to have the high deposit, but it’s really a one-time expense.
On the other hand at least in the US, a deposit of a buck or two wouldn’t do much. California has that for cans and bottles, yet only maybe 10% of people turn them in. Most end up in curbside recycling (which doesn’t refund) or the garbage, indicating people don’t care about getting their nickel or dime back.
Where I live in CA, many end up going to some stranger who rifles through everybody's curbside recycling bin before trash day. It's sad that times are hard, and this is the side job we've accidentally invented.
No, it’s there because the battery can’t hold enough charge for the ratio of vape liquid they put in it. So you get 2-3 full charges and it runs out of liquid.
reply