htrayl

joined 2 years ago
[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

The amount of handringing over it was always excessive. China has undergone a massive rural -> urban migration. They still are. The large majority of homes are being used, and more will continue to be. I feel like a china apologist here, but this narrative about ghost cities has always been very silly.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

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

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 42 points 3 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

Please don't spread misinformation about trade deficits. That is part of the "logic" that trump uses to justify US tariffs. Trade deficits are generally not all that important.

There are good reasons to switch from US goods and services - this is not one of them.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

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.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago
[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Tech has made things more efficient - the rewards of such are simply being funneled from the average person to the wealthy.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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).

[–] htrayl@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago

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

view more: ‹ prev next ›