4 billion even!

Also fair. I won’t pretend I’m following USDA or whatever naming rules (the “uncured” labeling is bullshit - oh we didn’t use straight potassium nitrate - just celery juice which contains the potassium nitrate), just going with the general language trend I see. YMMV

I did conflate cheese that has built in emulsifiers, “american cheese”, with imitation cheese product (likely the plastic wrapped slices melted onto that dish) which also has emulsifiers and has lower fat content and isn’t as nice. That’s on me, my bad.

tongue-in-cheek, not really ragging it but: “oooooo chemicals” like salt? The potassium nitrate in cured/“uncured” meats? Sodium citrate, one of the most common additives to keep cheese emulsified, is often used in sausage making…and apparently blood banks if wikipedia is to be believed. I know there are horrible things put in processed foods, but “chemicals” is not a useful way to distinguish them. I apologize in advance if I’ve read a too-unfavorable slant into your use of the word chemical.

“Authentic” Mexican food = Tex-Mex in many places. This looks like it.

For all the “cheese product” hate in here: it has its place in certain foods. My favorite response I’ve seen to calling it fake with “it isn’t cheese” is “is meatloaf meat?” Same concept. Meatloaf isn’t fake meat. It’s a product made with meat. Just like cheese with emulsifiers added. I think we just have different levels of linguistic classification attachment to different foods. It may not be “a” cheese, but it’s “cheese”. You’re not far off from going after almond/soy/oat milk.

nose hair trimmer attachment works well around the ears I’ve found (but it’s loud!)

cold cuts? Have you seen the price of a bag of chips? Ridiculous. I don’t need to spend 5 bucks to hate myself later after I’ve eaten too many.

$30 to buy an old mechanical pencil on ebay you remember having in highschool? No problemo.

DOJ wants to get in on some of that hot euro DMA action

What about the equivalent of foveated rendering? They’re only simulating the bits conscious observers can see, the rest is …not simulated to the same level? I guess you’re kind of going there with your model within a model thing. If we are the point of the simulation, there doesn’t seem to be much reason to simulate much beyond the planet besides what little astronomers can work with? Gonna crash this thing with enough players!

There’s a weird SF story that has blood cell sized intelligences and reality starts to break because there are so many observers on such a small scale that reality can’t change without being observed and then they all “poof” into another dimension or something and humans are left alone again. Anyway, the number of players crashing the simulation made me think of it. Blood Music by Greg Bear.

hypothetically cool, and very hypothetically legal

that’s a no on the cruciform for me, dawg. Yeesh. I’ll take everything else from there though, Poulsen, hawking drive, farcasters (maybe without the yoke of the AI techno core though), etc.

1848: earliest recorded “cool s” symbol (I know I know but it’s close!)

… But it was the organizers self censoring their entrants based on just the idea that the Chinese govt would take interest in/offense to some of the stories from what I can read. Haven’t seen any reporting suggesting the Chinese govt was actually involved at all. My thought is, why would the organizers hold the event in China if it was going to cause them to act the fool like this?

That was bad but at least short. I can’t ever hear “we’re going on an adventure” again without flashing back to that nightmare of a sequence of events.

Maybe don’t hold it in China again if they’re so worried about this sort of thing? They didn’t think that through did they? You think they might with, you know, science fiction often commenting on real life things through speculative analogues. They cowardly caved to just the idea of repercussions. Nothing in the article says the committee was actually under pressure from anyone to do what they did. Weak!

Your cynicism is warranted but a big part of the advertised value is that their rcs implementation is end to end encrypted. Or they say it is, which presumably someone (not me!) would be able to verify.

It’s weird because it is a standard but Google’s implementation is not really the standard. For insurance, the standard does not use end to end encryption, Google does. Their implementation also runs over their own Jibe servers rather than carrier stuff. You gotta be a Google bestie with muscle like Samsung to get your rcs client on Android seems like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services

Do you have information on it supporting rcs? I don’t see anything on the play store mentioning it. The first Google results I see say it doesn’t. Seems like it would be a big deal because if they did and would be prominently displayed as I thought only Google messages and Samsung messages supported rcs.

https://chomp.uservoice.com/knowledgebase/articles/1895488-rcs-implementation

High quality picture and video? Have you never exchanged pictures or video with a non iPhone user from your iphone? Pictures aren’t always horrible but video is basically unwatchable. Also end to end encryption, which is less obvious. Group chats are also borked by having a single non iPhone user in them. Android to android in most cases lately has high quality multimedia but that’s not true of mixed interactions.

to pick a nit and to highlight the other-than-poisoning-you aspect: they’re forever chemicals because they don’t break down naturally anywhere, not just your body. Wait…an idea: throw those pans into a volcano!

the “teflon fumes” for lack of a better term are extremely toxic to birds

one with wheels on it, right? Maybe important to note