I agree, but only to the extent that I found the various different typefaces for the e.g. "The Economy" somewhat off-putting, and not enough to downvote. I think sticking to one 'ornate' typeface (e.g. 𝕋𝕙𝕖 𝔼𝕔𝕠𝕟𝕠𝕞𝕪 or 𝒞𝓊𝓁𝓉𝓊𝓇𝑒) would have been sufficient for this post to make the point. The use of bolding was a bit excessive, but not enough to feel off-putting in the same way as the varied typefaces.

WRT

Note: You should not take omeprazole longer than 14 days since your body adapts to it.

You might be able to get a prescription to take omeprazole for a longer time if the heartburn is persistent. I am currently on a 3 month course, and the NHS page suggests that in some cases it is correct to take it for very long periods ("Depending on your condition or the reason you're taking omeprazole, you may only need it for a few weeks or months. Sometimes, you might need to take it for longer, even for many years.")

Thank you, that seems to have worked. Lightcone is now listed as eligible for matching on Benevity - will donate next week.

My employer's matching program currently doesn't accept Lightcone Infrastructure as a registered cause for donation matching, even though we're on your list of employer matching. We use Benevity, and the portal says that "a registration email has been sent to the cause", and that the cause should register through https://causes.benevity.org/ .

Is benevity registration on your list? I'd much rather donate with matching than without.

(From the UK, if that matters)

Is this a specific case of the general argument that "you can't ethically financially interact with people who are sufficiently poorer than you(r reference class), except through charity"? I think the arguments here:

• Sufficiently poorer people might not feel able to reject your offers
• SPP might not be able to make the best decisions
• You might be motivated to keep SPP that way, if you have the option of getting any utility from trading with them

are more general arguments than the specific case of factory building. I don't have a good answer to them, but kinda feel that it's disrespecting SPP's agency somehow?

I thought about it for about 5 minutes before deciding to script it, and got "fobs" and, annoyingly, dismissed "fres" as not a word.

I imagine if I had been more rigorous it wouldn't have taken long to get all the 4 letter ones, since they all have an internal vowel, which was the obvious place to start looking.

I wrote a check for this property for all the words in my system's inbuilt vim dictionary and got the following list:

Rubbish Words:

er, Livy, Lyly, na, ob, re, uh

Interesting Words:

an, fans, fobs, gnat, ravine, robe, serf, tang, thug

I'm in the same boat as you with regards to whether EPA/DHA has a bigger effect than ALA, but I was convinced enough to try to find some when I became vegetarian last year.

If you google "algal dha together" you'll find what I'm taking - meeting your criteria of vegetarian (vegan), eco-friendly and health-friendly (with aforementioned uncertainty)

ALA can also be found in flaxseed, soy/tofu, walnut and pumpkin, so you needn't stick to seaweed if you only want ALA.

I gave this a shot as well as since your value for E(T) → ∞ as T → ∞, while I would think the system should cap out at εN.

I get a different value for S(E), reasoning:

If E/ε is 1, there are N microstates, since 1 of N positions is at energy ε. If E/ε is 2, there are N(N-1) microstates. etc. etc, giving for E/ε = x that there are N!/(N-x)!

so S = ln [N!/(N-x)!] = ln(N!) - ln((N-x)!) = NlnN - (N-x)ln(N-x)

S(E) = N ln N - (N - E/ε) ln (N - E/ε)

Can you explain how you got your equation for the entropy?

Going on I get E(T) = ε(N - e^(ε/T - 1) )

This also looks wrong, as although E → ∞ as T → ∞, it also doesn't cap at exactly εN, and E → -∞ for T→ 0...

I'm expecting the answer to look something like: E(T) = εN(1 - e^(-ε/T))/2 which ranges from 0 to εN/2, which seems sensible.

EDIT: Nevermind, the answer was posted while I was writing this. I'd still like to know how you got your S(E) though.

We could really use a new Aral sea, but intuitively I'd expected that this would be a tiny dent in the depth of the oceans. So, to the maths:

Wikipedia claims that from 1960 to 1998 the volume of the Aral sea dropped from its 1960 amount of 1,100 km^3 by 80%.

I'm going to give that another 5% for more loss since then, as the South Aral Sea has now lost its eastern half enitrely.

This gives ~1100 * .85 = 935km^3 of water that we're looking to replace.

The Earth is ~500m km^2 in surface area, approx. 70% of which is water = 350m km^2 in water.

935 km^3 over an area of 350m km^2 comes to a depth of 2.6 mm.

This is massively larger that I would have predicted, and it gets better. The current salinity of the Aral Sea is 100g/l which is way higher than that of seawater at 35g/l, so we could pretty much pump the water straight in still with net environmental gain. Infact this is a solution to the crisis that has been previously proposed, although it looks like most people would rather dilute the seawater first.

To acheive the desired result of 1 inch drop in sea level, we only need to find 9 equivalent projects around the world. Sadly, the only other one I know of is Lake Chad, which is significantly smaller than the Aral Sea. However, since the loss of the Aral Sea is due to over-intensive use of the water for farming, the gives us an idea of how much water can be contained onland in plants: I would expect that we might be able to get this amount again if we undertook a desalination/irrigation program in the Sahara.