nix

The correlation between weight and health is a lot murkier than media in general, and these shows in particular, represent. It's much more reliable to measure blood and vitals, such as cholesterol and blood pressure, to establish wellbeing and risk.

Rapid changes in weight tho, in either direction, are well established for having permanent harmful effects. It also tends to make it more difficult to maintain weight loss, and more likely someone actually increases in weight over time.

These shows make it seem like losing weight at any cost is desirable, and don't put focus on the actually accurate metrics of wellbeing, while ignoring the negative long term impacts of rapid weight loss. It's a very warped view of health that focuses on an aesthetic feature.

I strongly recommend giving this podcast a try if you want more analysis: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-biggest-loser/id1535408667?i=1000505824482

I understand where you're coming from. It's true the survey doesn't have any male polling group to compare to, so it's difficult to quantify the difference.

But I still think it's valuable for a couple reasons. For one, I think improving biking conditions for women and improving them for everyone is largely the same thing, so for the most part the solutions are the same no matter how you frame it.

For two, there is good data showing that women bike less than men when there's less infrastructure, but that gap closes as the infrastructure improves. There might be a lot of reasons for that. I tend to believe, from comparing my experiences with the women I know, that it's a mix of women receiving more (and scarier) abuse while biking, and young men just being more risk-tolerant in general. So why I agree this article doesn't really prove that thesis, I'm personally inclined to think there's truth to it.

This is a good thought. FOSS has been historically not very good at utilizing the time and skills of potential non-coder volunteers, but community management is a great place for that.

That saying isn't trying to explain all of IP law. It's referring to products where there is no way to buy a copy you have permanent possession of. There's a reason you don't see the same fervor around pirating books.

If we did this kind of architecture everywhere, it wouldn't have to be. I wonder when the last of its neighbors were torn down.

Sad they ended up in that state, glad the land is finally going to get used.

All of those things can be produced without capitalism. Demand doesn't explain why this mode of production is used over another.

My trick is to choose 3 options, tell them to pick 2 of those, then I pick from those 2.

I like how gaps make things feel a little less cluttered, and show off the colors of my wallpaper. Same reason I use i3 with gaps on. It feels like everything is nicely organized instead of shoved together. In the end it's just an aesthetic preference.

The artist's personal website makes it sound like they're a mix of AI, photography, and other tools: https://www.kylebranchesi.com/about

Absolutely! The easiest way to not throw things away is to just have less things to throw away to begins with.

Or tape over the camera hole.