<ESC><ESC><ESC><ESC>ujj<ESC>u<ESC>v0wsffs<C-z><C-s><A-F4><A-enter>vim pres.typ...

False it’s a torus. I think. Resolution is a bit low to say for sure.

I was told there would be dopamine, but all I got was apparently ethylbenzene with some unspecified functional groups. Where’s the dopamine, Lois?

Edit: ironically, the last example (“alkylating agent itself”), despite sounding the most absurd, is actually probably the most feasible example to alkylate

The position of the drawn alkyl group seems to imply a bromonium, though, which is decidedly less easy to make.

Living things, on the other hand, conveniently have a bunch of cytosine and N-terminal proteins…

Alkylation is any reaction that attaches a saturated hydrocarbon group through one of its carbons to something else (more loosely, the hydrocarbon group may contain atoms besides H and C and only be saturated at the point of attachment). It’s pretty common in organic chemistry. The meme is portraying a humorous obsession with alkylation by listing alkylation agents and things the author wants to alkylate, including some unconventional or inadvisable targets.

Incidentally, a lot of alkylation agents are carcinogenic because they alkylate DNA.

Obsidian is pretty good. I currently use Logseq, which has a slightly different model that clicked a bit better for me. As a bonus, it’s open-source.

Wasn’t also /r/ich_iel a big part of the reddit exodus at one point?

This one got me giggling. And now I’m trying to explain to my MBA colleague what’s so funny about a pun from an (admittedly less and less) obscure niche of the programming community.

Yep, sorry for going between terms. Also, if the confusion stems from just calling it “alcohol” at one point, I was using the word in the more general chemical sense (molecules containing a C-OH group), a class to which isopropanol and ethanol belong.

No dunking, and make sure what you’re buying is mostly alcohol (> 95%) and not water/alcohol mixtures often used for disinfection. Using in combination with e.g., a toothbrush is probably your best bet. IPA (and acetone) can strip some adhesives and cause certain kinds of electrical insulation to swell or dissolve, so a targeted approach is better. IPA is flammable (though less so than acetone), so be careful/well ventilated when allowing parts to dry, and ensure parts are fully dried before reconnecting to power.

IPA itself is only about twice as toxic as ethanol and certainly less problematic by inhalation than tar in the long run. I wouldn’t bother with a mask mostly because it won’t do shit unless it’s a cartridge respirator. However, IPA can sometimes facilitate skin absorption. IDK specifically about tar buildup but recommend wearing gloves (disposable nitrile is fine).

don’t forget to make the space non-breaking :D

… this sounds absurd to me, at least as stated wrt the enzymes “dissolving” the floaters. Your body does not like foreign proteases floating around. I am also skeptical that the enzymes would survive denaturing and pepsin et al. in the stomach and duodenum (empty stomach or not), get absorbed intact, and somehow not get inactivated by the immune system (again, rogue protease = bad). Not to say that your floaters weren’t reduced (though the brain sometimes will just learn to ignore them) or even that the supplement wasn’t responsible via metabolites. Just, action of an intact enzyme itself seems unlikely. Corrections welcome; I’m going off my gut here and am not a biologist.

I know of a manager who unironically believes this for internal corporate technical reports (ours are academic style and more rigorous and formal than they need be…). It’s not quite to this extent, but I’ve overheard conversations where the manager apparently can’t fathom why their subordinates are incapable of double digits over a year.

Tbf sometimes it’s hard even for organic chemists because the authors will just put an abbreviation of a non-standard variation of the name of some named reaction over the reaction arrow and then proceed to draw the product in a completely different conformation from the starting material, leaving you trying to work out which carbon is which in the world’s most annoying game of spot-the-difference (or in many cases spot-the-similarity).

Maybe incorrect rebracketing? It’s supposed to be be-inhalten, not bein-halten. Otherwise maybe a writing style thing…

rip dubna, miratum got you beat

Ya but the moon covers at best only about 10 ppm of the sky’s area so given a random direction within the hemisphere defined by the sky in which the moon is visible and traveling in a straight line you have a roughly 99.9990% chance of missing so that’s understandable really.

I mean, sure, the choice of the “nice” numbers here is eccentric, but this is essentially the way math is taught nowadays. Only, instead of making 8 in this special case, the goal is usually to make 10 + leftovers because adding to 10 is always easy.

Here’s my (upper midwest) spicy mental math take: it should be big-endian and solved with backtracking for ripple carry/borrow. None of this starting-from-the-1’s-place-and-successively-incorporating-higher-order-digits nonsense. Extended carry/borrow is rare, and if you start with the most significant digits and give up/get bored part way through, the intermediate answer is in the ballpark of the real answer.

Roughly a truncated cone with diameters ~7 nuts and ~9 nuts, and the cup is ~12 nuts high (loose guesses, it is hard to tell due perspective and nuts of different sizes). Throw in an extra layer to account for the heap at the top (which is a dome taller than 1 hazelnut, but treating it as a shorter but full layer should give some error cancellation) to give a height of 13. The volume of a truncated cone of those dimensions is ~657 cubic hazelnut diameters. Random sphere packing is 64% space-efficient (though wall effects should decrease this number) giving a total of 420 nuts (nice).

Multiple edits for clarity and typos.

What’s the point of math if you can’t verify it empirically?