I made the turtle subreddits custom Snoo logo.

FR. My dad is dead and my mom is broke. And she’s partially broke because she helped me pay for college and I’m beyond grateful. But there’s no way she could help me financially anymore.

I read fried shrimp instead of friendship at first.

Agreed. I’m anti-authoriatiran first and a leftist second. I’ll gladly overlook disagreements on most policy for the sake of unity, but I won’t overlook authoritariansm.

I think, for some people, calorie counting is frutrating. Personally, I’m a bit too neurotic for it. I get really caught up in the details and coutning every calorie right and then frustration when the calories are reported incorrectly or if mutliple sources give different calorie values for the same raw ingredient. I honestly get so obsessive when I try to calorie count it becomes a borderline eating disorder. And, in fact, calroie counting has resulted in eating disorders for many people.

I think it’s good for a lot of other people. But, when it boils down to it, any diet you can stick to is the right diet for you. Seriously, research has shown time and time again that, after a few months, most diets have the same weight loss results for most people if they stick to it. So I personally don’t find the “its just calories in and out” rhetoric thats really popular to always be the most correct or helpful statment.

Ok but my point is you’re not just eating cake so its hard to keep track of the linear relationship sometimes. Calorie reporting can be incorrect and bodies are weird. That’s all I’m saying.

Realistically, being on most any diet is equally effective. From simple calorie counting to the keto diet. It turns out that, if you find a diet you can stick to, then just kind of paying attention to what you’re eating in a general sense works.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/

I wasn’t talking about fiber, but the sugars bound to fiber. Its very hard to accurately labele just the bioavailable calories, even if you account for things like fiber.

On the note of genetics, it’s not just about metabolism. People have different abilities to even absorb the same calories. People have food intolerances, different rates at which they move food through the digestive tract, and different intestinal permeability.

This isn’t meant as an excuse to eat junk and not pay attention to your food. But, I actually find more help in paying attention to food quality and listening to how your body interacts with different food. E.g., eat less processed food, be aware that eating fat slows digestion, pay attention to your intolerances, stop eating when full, cut out snacking (again, especially processed foods). If you do this, its very likely you won’t need to count at all.

That’s not to say that, if calorie counting works for you, then you shouldn’t do it. Its just not the end all be all people act like it is. Pretty much any diet and paying more attention to what you eat in any way works: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32238384/

Eh. Calories are… Tricky. What is a calorie? A unit of food which, when burned, will heat a gram of water by 1 degree Celsius. But your body isnt just a furnace, it’s complex. And everyone is physiologically different - we aren’t all running at the same efficiency (base metabolism). And not all calories are available. For example, fiber is not digestable and can’t be absorbed by the digestive system and it also associates with simple sugars which also prevents them from being properly absorbed. So, eating whole fruits will result in absorbing less sugar than drinking juice which has the same total amount of sugar. Processing food - even just cooking it - makes calories more bioavailable.

For sure it can conceptually be boiled down to calories effectively absorbed and calories burned. But digging into what that actually means can actually be quite tricky.

The vaccine has a risk of causing heart complications. It should be monitored. COVID has a much higher risk of heart complications.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9653149/

Pretty much this. Met him once. He’s has no scandals, he’s just kind of a rude guy.

I had a friend tell a story once about how he was on a field trip and the class found out Bill Nye was in the building. But once Bill found out kids were on the way he escaped out a window to avoid them. I’m not sure how true that is, but its kinda funny.

A trans person who hasn’t fully admitted to others (or perhaps even to themselves) that they’re trans.

I didnt say genetically compatible. Domesticated cats are nearly genetically indistinguishable from African wild cats. Genetic studies are difficult because cat species are so similar. In fact, several cat species including the house cats have been argued by geneticists to actually be subspecies of the same species.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5612713/

This is truly not the same for dogs or any other domesticated species… Except maybe the pidgeon. I could see a similar argument for some pidgeons. Not the tumblers.

Cats ate not native to north america. They’re descendants of African wild (and sometimes Eurasian wild) cats. Return them to wild habitats, not just feral colonies, and the feral cats fit right in. They are nearly indistinguishable from their wild counterparts and don’t struggle any more or less than them. That’s the difference between cats and other domesticated species. Domestication is a genetic change. But, if the genetic differences from their wild counterparts are so minimal, how domesticated are they really?

Cats are barely domesticated. What that essentially means is that cats, if placed in a wild colony, will thrive and blend right in. This is not true for other domesticated species. Research also indicates cats domesticated themselves more than people did. They found mice in grain silos and warm beds in peoples houses and fit right in without needing to adapt.

I don’t think humans are robbing cats of their freedom and anyone asserting so really doesn’t understand cats.

Not super common or super niche. I use R. And it completely made up code a year ago. Sometimes I still does, but less. And when I ask it for citations it can make shit up too. I really stand by the assertion that it needs a lot of babysitting.

But, between it getting better and me getting better at asking and some patience, I get what I want. But, it does require a lot of fine tuning and patience. But its still just faster than googling. And I could see the argument that the models haven’t improved but that they just have access to search engines now and that I’m mostly using them and a search engine. And sometimes they’re so whacked out I’ll ask them to search for something but theyll tell me they don’t have access to the internet and they’re so absolutely convinced of that that I have to close that chat and start a new one.

If you feed it in documentation or ask it to search for its answers in substack (or really just whatever search constraints you want) and then tell it to give you the links it used, you might have a better time. This forces it to look up an answer instead of hallucinate one. And when it gives me code, more complicated things usually fail pretty hard at first and I have to feed it the error output for a few rounds and guide it a lot.

I don’t know what to tell you. I have them successfully compiling tables of search outputs to compare different things for method development and generating code, saving me hours of work each week. It all needs to be checked, but the comparison comes with links and the code is proofread and benchmarked. For most of what I do it’s really just a jacked up search engine, but it’s able to scan webpages faster than me and that saves a lot of time.

As a hobby, I also have it reading old documents that are almost illegible and transcribing them pretty well.

I really don’t know what you’re doing that you’re just getting nonsense. I’m not.

Technology these days works in that they always lose money at the start. Its a really stupid feature of modern startups IMO. Get people dependent and they make money later. I don’t agree with it. I don’t really think oir entire economic system is viable though and that’s another conversation.

But LLMs have been improving exponentially. I was on board with everything you’re saying just a year ago about how they suck and they’re going to hit a wall even. But the don’t need more training data or the processing power. They have those and now they’re refining the LLMs. I have a local LLM on my computer that performs better than chat GPT did a year ago and it’s only a few GB. I run it on a shitty laptop.

LLMs with access to the internet are usually about as factually correct as their search results. If it searches someone’s blog, you’re right, the results will suck. But if you tell it to use higher quality resources, it returns better information. They’re good if you know how to use them. And they aren’t good enough to be replacing as many jobs as all these companies are hoping. LLMs are just going to speed up productivity. They need babysitting and validating. But they’re still an extremely useful tool that’s only going to get better and LLMs are here to stay.

I get the desire to say this, but I find them extremely helpful in my line of work. Literally everything they say needs to be validated, but so does Wikipedia and we all know that Wikipedia is extremely useful. It’s just another tool. But its a very useful tool if you know how to apply it.

Two low glycoalkaloid varieties are unlikely to create a high glycoalkaloid variety (and its unlikely to find a high glycoalkaloid variety outside of south America. But it’s possible. Like two short people having a tall child.

Also its probably sterile.