edmund_the_destroyer

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

I was coming to /f/Vegan to ask about high protein Vegan foods, and this is perfect, so thanks.

Almost every protein powder I've ever tried: whey (non-vegan), casein (non-vegan), pea, soy, hemp - multiple different brands of each - has given me diarrhea. The one exception was egg-based protein powder, and that didn't give me diarrhea but it's the most difficult food I've ever had to choke down. And of course it's non-vegan.

I find tofu delicious in some recipes and awful in others. I'll just keep doing my research.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

But the crucial bit is that a blockchain is public-key-signed transactions on top of a DHT. So I might not be able to make a particular transaction happen on a blockchain, but if it lists a transaction as having occurred then it did occur. So it doesn't prove everything and it can do things (good, bad, or neutral) in addition to proofs, but the things it lists as proved are actually proved.

1

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

My parents are in their late 60s and my mother is dying. But I'm still a coward for not telling them to go to hell - reference intentional - for continuing to support the Catholic Church.

To those who want evidence that a supreme being does not exist or at least has no connection with Christianity, I give you the Catholic Church.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

To wander off into academic territory, my understanding is that there is progress being made. You mentioned "capabilities" like OCAP, which is one path - Christopher Lemmer Webber has been doing work on on distributed trust-less computing with his Spritely project ( https://spritelyproject.org/ )

Crypto-currency is an abomination and a form of pyramid scheme and gambling. But the core technology, blockchain, allows for a form of distributed provable computation. My understanding, though, is that blockchains can't be used to prove any type of computation, just certain types. So I might be able to create a blockchain that proves that person A sent 5 and person B sent 3 and computer X running the software computed that the result was 8. But - again, as far as I understand it - nobody can create a blockchain that proves that computer X didn't also send the 5, 3, and 8 somewhere else. That is, blockchain can be used to prove some things a computer program did but it can't capture and prove a complete record of everything a computer program did.

4

edmund_the_destroyer wrote (edited )

I think most of the people telling these kinds of false 'rags to riches' stories actually believe what they're saying. They're blind to their advantages.

So for example, the US school funding model is classist. If your parents are wealthy you probably lived in a wealthy district and attended a good school. That's one huge advantage you didn't earn. Then they probably help you pay for college, and even if you took out the loans yourself they probably covered some of your living expenses through college. That's your second huge advantage. Then after graduation they probably provided you with a working car (maybe used, but that doesn't matter) and possibly rent-free living and free groceries at home while you started you career. That's your third.

Then you walk around thinking you're a self-started success story, when at least 80% of the population had more obstacles to capitalist success (so-called success).

Edit: I would add that the article says people making these mistakes downplay, omit, or don't recognize their upper class advantages. I think it's all "don't recognize".

4

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

There have been some brilliant memes on this. I can't find the best one I saw, but it was something like this: "Some hedge fund managers are on CNN saying that Wall Street is not a casino. What he really meant is that regular people aren't welcome in the Wall Street casino."

Even if you believe in capitalism, stock values are almost entirely useless. Stock prices are important at an IPO because it funds the company, and when one company can afford to buy another. Other than that, it's just gambling with silly rules.

4

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

I saw an explanation for the 140% shorting. The idea is that you sell shares, buy them back, and sell them again. If the stock price is racing downwards, it works fine.

But GameStop stock is now trading at 10x+ higher than it was when these big firms set up their short sales, and trying to buy enough shares to sell twice is costing billions.

4

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

Reply to comment by nega in Law and Civilization by nega

You are making an effort to be obfuscatory, and it makes your post needlessly confusing.

If you didn't care about reader understanding of your material, you would not post. You can't seek an audience of people that aren't experts in your material and then refuse to make your material understandable to people that aren't experts.

Your second point, for example, could have been written as: "You cannot control human behavior with carefully worded rules. That idea is based on a complete misunderstanding of human nature." That's 21 words instead of 50.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

Fascinating. My wife has had a stressful career for over twenty years and has had to cut back to part time work. She's had depression, fatigue, and migraines for years.

She blames it on a concussion from 7 years ago, and she may be right.

But it might be her lifelong insomnia and the stress of the job and parenting. Her symptoms got worse after the concussion, but even well before it she didn't have the same energy and focus at 32 that she did at 22.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote (edited )

I have no reason to doubt the results of the study.

However, their discussion omitted the fact that most people who lose more than 10% of their starting body weight regain it within five years. Taking a fat person to thin and keeping them there is likely to fail, contrary to what the billion dollar diet and fitness industry tries to sell you.

Most people I knew who lost a substantial amount of weight and kept it off over a long term are retirees. They don't have the physical and especially mental and emotional burdens of a job. They don't have financial worries. They spent time exercising, and going for walks, and gardening for fun, and building things with their hands for the joy of it. They savor their meals and notice when they are satiated instead of shoveling down food before being forced to shoulder their next burden.

I really think capitalism caused the obesity epidemic.

(Edit: I split some run-on sentences into separate sentences.)

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

A lot of the election fraud claims were denied and fought in court by Republican lawyers, Republican state officials, and Republican judges.

Trump and his election fraud lawyers didn't have any credible claims. Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson repeatedly invited them to his show to present their evidence to his viewers, and they never returned his call.

So if there was election fraud, it was a huge, perfectly hidden Republican conspiracy to sabotage Trump.

4

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

I should have stopped being surprised years ago. But it still does surprise me that the conspiracy theories have reached the point that Trump and his supporters can say anything, and contradict themselves, and the supporters just go with it.

He could probably announce that water is dry and the sky is pink at midnight, and only lose a tiny percent of his followers.

3

edmund_the_destroyer wrote

Just about everyone I know personally still associates "anarchism" with the villains in Mission Impossible and James Bond films and the living conditions in Mad Max and other stories of post-apocalyptic wastelands. One of the labels used for the people rioting in DC was "anarchists". I didn't see that one much in the mainstream media, but I saw it on social media.

I can't make an educated guess about Marxists in general, but none of the Marxists that I know have a meaningful understanding of anarchism. When I call myself a leftist with anarcho-communist leanings I just get odd looks and people change the subject.

2