htrayl

There are quite the number of fitness bands and watches that can do this too for android. No reason you cant set up a device to the opposite partners phone.

The Jumanji sequels. You are going to take a cult classic and “revive” it by changing the premise to be a video game? Stupid. But, it was much better than it should have been.

I would say they still are reluctant. Maybe less so. In modern conversatioms, there is a very subtle implication that acknowledging queerness is inappropriate unless very explicit - even then you will get comments like “they didn’t have the same understanding about orientation or gender identity”.

In otherwords, there is still a strong undercurrent that straightness should be the default, rather than just one of the options.

Also, if you are really concerned, but think youll have something like diesel available, EVs are still better as not only are they more flexible, but a pretty low cost multi-fuel generator could charge it.

The dipshittiest of comments. Spend some time learning some basic crash physics.

Beyond the clear use of the word “person” - go ahead and tell me how you know if someone is not an citizen before you rescind your own requirement for due process?

Or, how many citizens should lose due process because you decide to skip it?

If you decide to provide exceptions, you will inevitably have a substantial error rate.

Of course, i suspect that is considered a bonus to these nazis.

The lack of food safety makes my eye twitch.

Oof. Such a bad idea. It does demonstrate that “We mostly care that they aren’t contributing to taxes” is just a garbage excuse.

Supreme Court is still an important source of perceived legitimacy. The further authoritarians can push the Supreme Court to rubber stamp their power, the weaker public response will be.

Its similar to a form of “divine right” really.

Of course, the Supreme Court has to have its own trust and perceived legitimacy in order to convder it.

This is what basically worked a few years ago. Massive mess, a huge pain, but it worked.

Also, many times they will say some isn’t an authentic way to do something, and then you will learn it is authentic for like, a few towns over.

If this actually is about climate - China installed 50% of all new renewable capacity last year. 50% of the entire world.

The lack of specificty is also a strategy used to bolster support for deregulation.

Simply say “we are eliminating regulations” , and dont ever talk about what you are deregulating, because actually many regulations are a net good for society and were implemented for a reason. Preventing companies from dumping poison is a regulation.

Amouranth?

Im going to say the Harvard estimate is probably pretty close. It is probably a bit higher than what you would need on a day to day basis for survival, but enough to help your body maintain some muscle over the long term.

Its not enough for someone wanting to be fit or muscular though.

That diet doctor recommendation feels wildly high for a “what is actually necessary” request. Like 2 g/kg is near the target for bodybuilders.

It might be a good idea for many people to hit that to maximize muscle development in preparation for aging (where muscle deterioration is chief concern), but not a good estimate for anyone who isnt worried about that.

They also say two further things which ding their credibility:

First is this comment: “Because there appears to be a limited amount of protein that can be absorbed at a meal, it may be best to evenly space out your protein throughout the day, if possible.”

This is not really a concern even for bodybuilders. You dont need to overthink spacing.

Second is the comment about vegetarians/vegans. Protein intake is not a huge concern for the average vegetarian, if you are not aiming for that unnecessarily high target - as long as they are regularly including some protein in their meals (soy, beans, nuts, eggs). Even for non-vegetarians, that higher target requires you to monitor of your protein intake to hit it regularly with overeating.

This is a classic organizational problem. Different teams have opposing priorities and work against each other (or even against the overall good for the people thet service).

The ability for those on the left to eat each other up never disappoints.

In general, I disagree with you. I think the two things you fixated on (souless architecture and rentals) are bad approaches to density, but you will notice that for the most part, this is the form of “density” that places who are notoriously bad at density do. Its what happens when we deliberately regulate ourselves into not allowing other options.

There is a pretty crazy amount of “density” in well bit, low rise structures - though actually I dont personally hate on towers as a concept.

Also, i would like to highlight that a very small portion of people are living in newly built homes, and only a small portion are really able to make meaningful design impact. Most just buy the builder-grade suburban model home. The idea that suburban single family homes are some design panacae is just wrong.

The average American spends $10k YEARLY on car. You could buy a new bike every month and still end up paying less.