It’s not bad UX, it’s part of the experience of driving the car. Something that a Ferrari buyer probably cares more about than a Tesla buyer. I personally miss the physical keys on older cars that you had to insert and turn to start the car because you’re directly controlling the starter/engine. It feels like you’re driving a car and not using an appliance. There are people who prefer manual transmissions for similar reasons.

My current car has keyless entry and start, and I don't really miss having to insert the key and turn the ignition. And I especially don't miss those ignition switches that were mounted on the side of the steering wheel where it was impossible to see the keyhole. At least the start button on my dash is in an easily visible spot.

I just recently started to. Stopped using pretty much all Google services years ago, but the company I work for now uses (and heavily relies on) Google Workspace, so couldn’t avoid it. Being able to log into a browser and have all of your bookmarks, history, settings, and passwords is great. I know brave and Firefox offer this too, but those experiences just aren’t as seamless

I would never want to sync my personal browsing data to my work computer and I wouldn't want to give my work an excuse to look at my personal computer by syncing my work data to my personal computer.

Hmm will be for the super rich for sure. Lets say one air canister is 160 breaths. And this canister is premium lol, and cost 32 bucks. cost per breath is $.20. Avg person = 16 breaths per minute. Cost per minute : $2.30. Cost per hour $192. Cost per day $4608. Cost per year: $1,618,920!

HAIL SKROOB!

On the bright side, our carbon emissions will go way down

Decay produces a lot of carbon emissions.

Only in an aerobic environment, no?

CO2 requires oxygen. Methane is worse, but it's still carbon emissions.

It depends on the kind of person you are. Others might be able to share their experiences, but they don’t know you and how it’ll affect you.

Go with your gut.

Wikipedia could operate non the money it already has for years without any more fundraising.

The money from the donations goes to the Wikimedia Foundation, which uses it mostly for political purposes

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33170710

There aren’t any exercise (in whatever amount) that lead to fat loss? Sounds like massive cope. It’s extremely obvious that doing something like running every day (if it leads to a calorie deficit) will make you lose fat.

When you start having a sense of how many cals any amount of exercise burns, no. It's way faster not to ingest them in the first place.

Well, I've tried it. I've lost tons of weight, but never with exercise. So it's not cope, it's just a matter of science.

> It’s extremely obvious that doing something like running every day (if it leads to a calorie deficit) will make you lose fat.

But what if it doesn't because your body is a self-regulating dynamic system that changes energy partitioning and intake demands based on output?

If you spend more energy than your body takes in, there is no way you don’t lose weight, no matter what your body does with it.

If someone isn’t losing weight on a caloric deficit, they’re not tracking their food intake and exercise properly.

Your body can't magic up energy out of nothingness. If you reduce your caloric intake enough, you'll always lose weight.

So you're saying science is wrong? Cause I ran the experiment and it failed.

The reason is, of course, that your body can downregulate energy expenditure according to energy intake. I've observed my body downregulate to about 1,000kcal/day. No fat loss on a 1kkcal/day OMAD diet for 2 months straight. No exceptions.

If you get below the bare minimum (say 1kkcal/day for me) your body will start shutting down pretty essential systems like the immune system, you won't be able to concentrate, sleep will be messed up.

Yes, I've done all these experiments, obviously.

> So you're saying science is wrong? Cause I ran the experiment and it failed.

So by "science", you mean your n=1 "experiment" and not conservation of energy?

Yes, of course. Only takes 1 experiment to disprove a hypothesis, remember?

Conservation of energy is a whole other story and I don't see how it's related to fat loss.

The problem is: human body is very energy efficient, and processed food is very calorie dense. Burning enough calories to make up for all the junk food is almost impossible, except maybe for professional athletes that spend 5+ hours a day training or competing. You can't outrun a doughnut, basically.

How is your personal opinion on investing in crypto relevant here?

Is “unhoused neighbors” your term for homeless people?

It’s a term for street homeless because the homelessness industrial complex decided to inflate the stats by conflating couchsurfing people with the visibly homeless.

"unhoused" means not having housing.

"neighbors" are people who live nearby, in the neighborhood.

Maybe visually. Not practical

Do they have analog dials for speed and RPM?