Arthur's recent activity
-
Comment on Tildes Demographics Survey, year… uh, it’s 2024? in ~tildes
-
Comment on Norway's national football stadium has the world's largest vertical solar roof – new solution for northern regions, yielding 20% more energy than traditional panels in ~enviro
Arthur LinkAs I was reading this I thought, 'why don't they paint the roof white, wouldn't that boost power generated?' But since they hadn't, I assumed there was a good reason the roof wasn't painted white....As I was reading this I thought, 'why don't they paint the roof white, wouldn't that boost power generated?' But since they hadn't, I assumed there was a good reason the roof wasn't painted white. Perhaps it didn't work. Then I read this:
Vertical PV panels also benefit from the albedo effect, where snow falling between the rows reflects sunlight on
So perhaps they just don't paint it white because white paint isn't as reflective as snow or it isn't cost efficient? Maybe the white paint will dirty?
But later it says:
The company observed how its product performs in southern regions as well. “It performs well, especially when paired with white coloured roofs, which is highly reflective and which are common in hotter, sunnier countries to reduce heat absorption,” notes Mongstad.
So now I'm even more confused why they don't paint the roof white? I thought perhaps it was for heat absorbtion, but... It's a stadium, so it's not exactly like they're using that heat to heat the building.
-
Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tech
Arthur Link ParentI have to agree. As much as I dislike Twitter, and loathe Musk, I can't understand the motivations of Brazil here. It's easy enough to argue that the state has a duty of care to protect it's...I have to agree. As much as I dislike Twitter, and loathe Musk, I can't understand the motivations of Brazil here. It's easy enough to argue that the state has a duty of care to protect it's citzens from misinformation.
What's really quite difficult to argue is that that duty of care extends as far as people who don't want that care , ex: VPN users. I have to assume that anyone who has enough digital literacy to install a VPN also has the knowhow (even if they don't utilise that) to assess the legitimacy of the media they consume.
The fine is also totally disproportionate for a 'crime' that solely effects yourself. A quick Google search (could be wrong, I didn't do that much research) suggests that R$50,000 is around half the average annual salary. It's a life-changing amount of money considering it was totally legal 24 hours ago.
-
Comment on PhD Simulator in ~games
Arthur Link Parent5 years and 1 month for me on my first try. I finished with 99 hope. I also never slacked off, so I'm not sure how that works. I also got to see one conference city. (And invested in a failed...5 years and 1 month for me on my first try. I finished with 99 hope. I also never slacked off, so I'm not sure how that works. I also got to see one conference city. (And invested in a failed crypto currency).
-
Comment on 'Skibidi Toilet' film & TV franchise in the works from Michael Bay in ~movies
Arthur Link ParentMy apologies, I thought you were asking the question in earnest.My apologies, I thought you were asking the question in earnest.
-
Comment on 'Skibidi Toilet' film & TV franchise in the works from Michael Bay in ~movies
Arthur (edited )Link ParentWhy are books adapted into movies? Why are animated films adapted into live action? Why do people write fanfiction of the franchises they love? Art for arts sake - why shouldn't people create...Why are books adapted into movies? Why are animated films adapted into live action? Why do people write fanfiction of the franchises they love?
- Art for arts sake - why shouldn't people create things they enjoy? Why make sequels and prequels and spinoffs if the original had a 'good enough' narrative? Because people like to create.
- It's popular - people like (or think they like) remakes of things. Why has Avatar the Last Airbender been recreated in live action not once but twice? Thus:
- Money - let's not be naive, the most realistic reason for creating a movie like this. Michael Bay & the team behind this clearly think there's a profit to be made.
-
Comment on Slugs - how are you coping? in ~life.home_improvement
Arthur (edited )LinkReporting from the frontlines in northern rural UK. The slugs have been declared public enemy number one, as they have gone on the offensive this year and have claimed countless lives. Our entire...Reporting from the frontlines in northern rural UK. The slugs have been declared public enemy number one, as they have gone on the offensive this year and have claimed countless lives. Our entire squadron of carrots were destroyed almost immediately after deployment. They were the lucky ones. The Cabbage unit has been continuously eaten at just below the rate of maintenance. They are slowly getting larger, but each new leaf is eaten overnight eaving only a slimy muched stem the next day. The beans are growing faster than the slugs can munch, for now... The onions, though unpopular, are still being eaten, although not enough to seriously hinder their growth.
Far too many peppers (and chillis) have been munched through, although the ones in the greenhouse are fairing slightly better.
The lettuce is doing remarkably well, but I think that's just because it's growing faster than even the slugs can eat. The broccolis are one bad day away from being no more.
So far, in our entire force, only the tomatoes have resisted being eaten. It seems the slugs are entirely uninterested. I thought that the potatoes, being reasonably close relatives, would also be safe, but alas they also bare the telltale signs of war.
This is my first year growing as many crops as I've grown, so I can't say if the slugs this year are worse than previous years, but it certainly feels like the situation couldn't get much worse. In terms of home invasion, I've yet to find a slug indoors although I have seen a trail on the carpet.
I watched a YouTube video of sombody else dealing with their slug infestation, and he used beer traps and a bright torch a bucket of salty water. The comments suggested using a bucket of hot water instead, so that the slug corpses can be left out for the more desirable nightlife, birds, or be put in the compost (where they belong). Slug pellets, though expensive and inefficient (?), may help younger plants get off their feet and help them start growing faster than they can be eaten. I've also heard crushed eggskeys may help, althiigh I'm not sure on that. At the very worst they'll provide some nutrients for the soil. But to be honest, I can't help but feel like it's a bit of a lost cause this year. Between the slugs and the birds eating my brussels, I'll be overjoyed if I can even get half a crop this year.
Like OP, I eagerly await backup as we're close to being overwhelmed out here. I really hate those little guys. I know they play a very important role in the ecosystem, but to be honest, if I could monkey paw them away, I'd do it in a heartbeat, even if it meant the total and inevitable collapse of the entire ecosystem, just to spite them.
-
Comment on What gaming genre could use a renaming? in ~games
Arthur Link ParentMaybe it's just because I'm on the cusp, or maybe I'm not spending enough time online, but I haven't really seen much beef between gen Z and the Millennials. I know for a lot of people my age, Gen...Maybe it's just because I'm on the cusp, or maybe I'm not spending enough time online, but I haven't really seen much beef between gen Z and the Millennials. I know for a lot of people my age, Gen Z wasn't really a common term by the time we started feeling like we belonged to a generation, so a lot of us grow up identifying with the Millennials even if we weren't.
I also saw very little beef between Gen Z and Gen A. It feels to me like the 3 successive generations really are quite friendly with each other. Meanwhile, everyone hates the boomers and nobody really knows who Gen X are.
-
Comment on YouTube tests harder-to-block server-side ad injection in videos in ~tech
Arthur LinkWhatever happened to YouTube blocking users who had adblocks on? I got the threatening 'you will be blocked if you continue to use ad blockers' warning, switched to FreeTube for a few weeks, and...Whatever happened to YouTube blocking users who had adblocks on? I got the threatening 'you will be blocked if you continue to use ad blockers' warning, switched to FreeTube for a few weeks, and then switched back over to YouTube with adblock on with zero problems.
-
Comment on Denmark has recalled several spicy ramen noodle products by South Korean company Samyang, claiming that the capsaicin levels in them could poison consumers in ~food
Arthur Link ParentDefinitely worth reading on a little further. Right after the quote you provided is the following: On studies done on mice: In the 'discussion' section at the end: From the way it's written, it's...- Exemplary
Definitely worth reading on a little further. Right after the quote you provided is the following:
Therefore, we may not be comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Indeed, in the US, Mexican-Americans on western diet still have a higher incidence of gastric carcinoma than their white compatriots [30]. To explain this paradox, it was postulated that it is not capsaicin per se, but the combination of high capsaicin consumption, H. pylori colonization, and IL1B-31 C > T genotype (which is more prevalent in Mexicans) that increases the risk for gastric cancer [31,32].
To add to the confusion, a large population-based study involving 16,179 American adults followed for 18.9 years reported a mortality of 21.6% among those who eat chili regularly compared to 33.6% mortality among those who do not [33]. This translates to a hazard ratio of 0.87, indicating a smaller risk of dying earlier for chili-eaters.
A similar health benefit (a 14% reduction in mortality) for regular spicy food consumption was found by analyzing the China Kadoorie Biobank data in which almost half million Chinese were enrolled [34]. Importantly, the chili-eater group also showed lower cancer-related death rate. Indeed, chili may be “too hot for cancer to handle”
On studies done on mice:
In other studies, pure capsaicin was used. B6C3F1 mice were fed chow containing 0.25% capsaicin for 79 weeks [37]. On week 83, the animals were killed and autopsied: no difference in tumors was found compared to controls [37]. By contrast, more Swiss mice on life-long capsaicin diet (0.03125%) developed more cecum adenomas than controls: 22% versus 8% [38].
In the 'discussion' section at the end:
The literature on capsaicin and cancer is vast. A search of PubMed with these keywords has identified 876 papers, including a large number (152) of reviews. The internet also contains less scholarly articles on the health benefits [138] (or, conversely, deleterious effects [139]) of consuming hot, spicy food.
Unfortunately, the literature on capsaicin and cancer is confusing with different groups reporting exactly the opposite results. From this large body of literature, only two conclusions can be drawn. First, dietary capsaicin in “restaurant-like doses” is most likely safe to eat, though extremely hot concoctions are better avoided. Second, topical capsaicin creams and patches probably carry no risk for skin cancer.
From the way it's written, it's not clear if the authors' recommendation of avoiding high doses of capsaicin because it's definitely/probably bad, or simply because it's 'better safe than sorry'. In any case, the literature is confusing/complex, and although the authors do advise against excessive consumption of capsaicin, it's unclear just how strong they feel the link is.
Edit: Also, conflict of interest: I super love these spicy noodles and all spicy food in general (much hotter than 'restuarant doses') so I really would love to think that capsaicin doesn't cause cancer and instead fights it. On the other hand, spicy food is one of the things that makes life pleasurable to me (much like a good wine or a beer), so even if it were proven beyond any doubt to be carsinogenic I probably still wouldn't stop consuming it (much like a good wine or beer).
-
Comment on Pride Month at Tildes: #1 - Introductions and Playlist in ~lgbt
Arthur Link ParentThis statement almost perfectly encapsulates my feelings on the matter. Technically, I don't think Karma is an excellent song. The other artists I listed have amazing, thought provoking albums...Quite literally, JoJo did nothing new, nothing revolutionary, and at best it should have received some criticism and be forgotten in a week or so (but the song still bangs, it deserves to be popular).
This statement almost perfectly encapsulates my feelings on the matter. Technically, I don't think Karma is an excellent song. The other artists I listed have amazing, thought provoking albums that are more than just pop. They sing songs that make me feel things. They have produced some of the (imo) best music videos of the decade. Billie Eilish is famous for her music videos, Chapel Roan's music videos are excellently produced (Red Wine Supernova, Casual, and My Kink is Karma). One of Your Girls by Troye Sivan is both an unhinged amount of sexy, but also something that shocked me in a 'gooped and gagged' kind of way.
Karma is none of that. Lyrically, it is lacking. To me, the highlight is claiming that you're a bad girl and that you've done bad things, but then wishing you'd never "f'd" around. The music video is uninteresting.
I agree with your assessment of the controversy surrounding the song, I feel a lot of the hate is just people hating because they can.
All that's being said though, I still find myself singing it, and enjoy listening to it. It's a catchy pop song, and not every single one has to be deep. On the other hand though, I actually think the drama surrounding it is part of why I like it in the first place. I probably wouldn't have listened to the song twice had it been released with no fanfare/controversy. The fact that JoJo overhyped a song, released it to a mountain of hate, and claimed it was revolutionary queer pop is so fascinating to me, and so I do get an additional sense of joy and amusement when I listen to it now.
-
Comment on Pride Month at Tildes: #1 - Introductions and Playlist in ~lgbt
Arthur LinkHi everyone, I'm Arthur! Happy pride month! I'm a bisexual non-binary man (???, I know -I'm still figuring that one out) I've been on Tildes for a long time now (almost 6 years now?!?), but you...Hi everyone, I'm Arthur! Happy pride month! I'm a bisexual non-binary man (???, I know -I'm still figuring that one out)
I've been on Tildes for a long time now (almost 6 years now?!?), but you might not recognise me because I've spent most of that time lurking. If you have seen me, I've probably been discussing LGBT issues (especially trans rights), British politics, or the often unfortunate intersection of the two. I used far too many brackets (because why not), which I'm sure upsets some people, but hey, it works for me.
I was enjoying reading the replies to this post and wasn't going to write anything, but decided to in the end because I was raised by queer spaces on the internet and didn't (and still don't) get the support I needed from my family. Queer spaces online genuinely saved my life so I know how important they are.
My contribution to the gaylist includes:
This Hell - Rina Sawayama
Lunch - Billie Eilish
Rush -Troye Sivan
Red Wine Supernova - Chapel RoanAnd then semi-nonironically if that's allowed:
Karma - Jojo Siwa
Like, I know it's not a good song but there's something so campy about the whole thing I can't help but love it just a tiny bit. I never claimed to have good taste in music, but I do know my way around mainstream gay pop.
-
Comment on UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak pitches mandatory national service at eighteen in ~society
Arthur Link ParentThis doesn't really make much more sense given the full quote because he talks about forcing teenagers (under 18s) through education. Those being offered up for national service are 18, and thus...This doesn't really make much more sense given the full quote because he talks about forcing teenagers (under 18s) through education. Those being offered up for national service are 18, and thus legal adults.
It would have made far more sense to talk about how we force people to pay taxes, but he wouldn't do that because 1. It's bad optics for the Tories to be seen talking about people paying tax, and 2. The Tories often don't force (rich) people to pay their taxes.
Also, you can't prime a lifelong habit of volunteering by forcing people to volunteer. That's quite literally not what the word means.
-
Comment on UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak pitches mandatory national service at eighteen in ~society
Arthur (edited )Link ParentWhat's so terrible about allowing 16 & 17 year olds the vote? Currently, policies they have no say on are being debated for the general election. The only people who will be affected by Rishi's...What's so terrible about allowing 16 & 17 year olds the vote? Currently, policies they have no say on are being debated for the general election. The only people who will be affected by Rishi's National Service don't get to vote on it. As Keir pointed out, 16 and 17 year olds can work, pay tax, join the military, drink*, drive**, start families, consent to medical treatment (including to not have treatment), and consent to sex. They may not be at the height of intellectual or emotional maturity (for that matter neither are the 80+ voting population), but we should afford them the right to vote because functioning members of society deserve a say in how society runs, and how they're treated in that society.
As an example, young people are still facing the consequences of Brexit, a vote they had no say in over 8 years later. Granted, I'm not saying 8 year olds should be allowed to vote, although I think it's more than clear that the arbitrary line of 18 can and should be moved earlier, not least because unlike the older population, issues that young people can't vote on will affect them for the next 70+ years.
*In public at a restaurant sometimes, at home or on other private premises always
** When you're 17 -
Comment on Internet use statistically associated with higher wellbeing, finds new global Oxford study in ~tech
Arthur (edited )Link Parent'Normal' of course is relative. But in 2020 in the UK (a country with one of the highest internet access rates in the world), only 92% of the adult population were "recent" internet users. 95% of...'Normal' of course is relative. But in 2020 in the UK (a country with one of the highest internet access rates in the world), only 92% of the adult population were "recent" internet users. 95% of households had internet access, meaning 5% didn't. Only 54% of adults aged 75 years and over were classed as recent internet users.
The internet isn't the only medium today, not by a long shot, especially for disabled, elderly, or homeless people, and there are a suprising amount of people who don't use the internet, even for developed countries like the UK.
Edit: Elsewhere, the UK Gov website defines a recent internet user as sombody who has used the internet in the past 3 months before taking the survey.
-
Comment on Switzerland's Nemo wins Eurovision as UK comes 18th in ~music
Arthur (edited )Link ParentNormally I wouldn't reply to a comment like this, I've made my opinion clear and you've made yours clear. I'm happy to let you have yours and me have mine. In my experience, replying past this...Normally I wouldn't reply to a comment like this, I've made my opinion clear and you've made yours clear. I'm happy to let you have yours and me have mine. In my experience, replying past this point often risks conversations just going into pointless arguments. However, in this particular case, I feel it's important for me to make a further argument.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying (I'm paraphrasing here), 'Its baseless to say Olly Alexander received no points in the Eurovision public vote because of homophobia (to any degree) because many people who watch Eurovision are queer.'
I don't follow this for several reasons. Firstly, although I agree that many Eurovision fans are queer, it doesn't mean they all are. Indeed, it's clear there was a homophobic response to the song. Precisely the scale of this homophobia is unclear, but it certainly isn't hard to find it, suggesting that it is at least fairly rife.
Secondly, homophobia/queerphobia isn't a monolith. Queerphobia to different groups manifests itself in different ways. For better or worse (probably worse), female homosexuality has been been better tolerated in the public eye in the west. In the early 2000s, lesbians were unusual, but sexy, often depicted so for the male gaze. Gay men and gay sex specifically were depicted as undesirable and gross. Neither is good, I'm not arguing that one is better than the other, I'm just making a point that they're different. Eurovision is a gay event, and queer people have often done well at it (this year there were two non-binary people in the top 6), but how the audience reacts to different kinds of queerness does differ. It seems to me from my very anecdotal life experience, that graphic gay sexuality is still on the more unacceptable side of queer expression.
As a continuation on this thought, even if the entire audience of Eurovision were queer, I'd still expect homophobia to be a part of the event, even if small. Much like being a person of colour doesn't magically stop you from being racist, being queer doesn't stop you from being homophobic. Unfortunately, homophobia is so entrenched in our society that many queer people hold onto some of the homophobic teachings of our cultures. These are engrained within us from a young age and can be difficult to identify, nevermind root out. That's not to mention the intergroup queerphobia that can sometimes persist. As a bisexial non-binary person, I have faced two different kinds of queerphobia from queer people. Being LGBT doesn't make you immune from holding negative opinions on LGBT people.
In fact, it's possible that Eurovision being gay (and homophobia existing) could be part of the reason the UK got no votes. In a competition largely seen as Queer by a queer audience, most people won't vote for a gay act because it's gay - the whole thing is gay to some degree. Homophobes on the other hand, are more motivated not to vote for an explicitly gay act, but they may be much more comfortable voting for a person who happens to be queer even if their act was not.
My original assertion, and one that I still maintain, is that Olly Alexander received no points in the public vote largely because of Eurovision politics, but also at least in part because his act was explicitly gay. I don't believe it is baseless at all to suggest that homophobia played a part, however small, in how people voted. The other comments in this thread suggest that the song simply was unpopular, and although I don't agree, I'll take note that I seem to be outnumbered here. It's not something we'll ever know, so arguing about it is fairly pointless, but I made this argument anyway because it sat badly with me to suggest that homophobia isn't a part of how the public votes, simply because homophobia is very real and alive in the west.
-
Comment on Switzerland's Nemo wins Eurovision as UK comes 18th in ~music
Arthur Link ParentWhether you think the song is bad or not is entirely subjective. I liked the song - I'm sorry you didn't. What isn't subjective is the fact (no quotation marks) that Olly Alexander faced a huge...Whether you think the song is bad or not is entirely subjective. I liked the song - I'm sorry you didn't.
What isn't subjective is the fact (no quotation marks) that Olly Alexander faced a huge amount of homophobic backlash for the song he performed. Just search his name on twitter and many of the top results are homophobic to some degree.
-
Comment on Switzerland's Nemo wins Eurovision as UK comes 18th in ~music
Arthur (edited )LinkI was surprised to see the UK receive 0 points in the public vote. I didn't think it was a bad song, or a bad performance, but the offical YouTube video for it has (from what I can see with my...I was surprised to see the UK receive 0 points in the public vote. I didn't think it was a bad song, or a bad performance, but the offical YouTube video for it has (from what I can see with my chrome extension) almost 1:1 like to dislike ratio. Was it political (e.g. Brexit?, Olly Alexander's approach to Palestine?), was it homophobia (explicitly gay), or was it puritanism (explicitly sexy).
I'm inclined to think a mix of politics and homophobia, although mostly politics. Discourse around why the UK has been scoring so badly in the past few years has often focused on the idea that "the UK doesn't take it seriously", and "never sends real celebrities/good singers". This year we did, and although we got a few points from the Jury (which should be removed anyway imo), I don't think the song deserved 0 points from the public vote.
In regards to why Israel got so many, as others have raised, it's easier to vote for something than against something in Eurovision, but also, importantly, many of the people I know who usually watch Eurovision (myself included) decided to boycott this year. I don't know the official statistics or if that made a dent at all in the viewing/voting figures, but it would explain why so many countries voted Israel +10 or more, if large numbers if people who would normally vote anything but Israel were instead not voting at all.
-
Comment on US Supreme Court leaves in place a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify users' ages in ~society
Arthur Link ParentAs I said, I'm not really qualified to engage in discussion about that, I simply haven't researched the facts. I think it's an important discussion to have, but not an argument I'm making (for...As I said, I'm not really qualified to engage in discussion about that, I simply haven't researched the facts. I think it's an important discussion to have, but not an argument I'm making (for either side).
-
Comment on US Supreme Court leaves in place a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify users' ages in ~society
Arthur (edited )Link ParentWe ban (restrict) those things because they're harmful, not because they're addictive. If you want to make the claim that porn is harmful, either through it's creation or consumption, that's a...We ban (restrict) those things because they're harmful, not because they're addictive. If you want to make the claim that porn is harmful, either through it's creation or consumption, that's a different issue. (And not one I'm qualified to engage in discussion about). But addiction alone is a poor qualifier for banning something. I mean studies suggest that even sugar might be addictive (and harmful, for that matter). Hell, some people find exercise addictive!
Welcome back @TheMeerkat !
I've missed these surveys! I mentioned that we hadn't had one in quite a long time to another user a while back and thought that we might get another one, but it never happened.
I would have done it myself but... Let's be real, I don't have those skills- and you always did a great job of it back in the day. Glad to have you back (and not just because I missed the surveys)!