Nope!

(DMed the most recent residents - they moved out at the end of the lease term about a month ago)

I was the co-game-master for 2018 Oxford/Seattle and had to make a call about whether the game-end launch was legit. Your telling is accurate - the guy who pressed the button indeed acted unilaterally and (he claims) thought the button was disabled.

Setting it all up was damned expensive: she died at ninety - about 70 years of redaction time multiplied by a typical human metabolic rate and mass landed you with a lot of redaction entropy. Look at the price of energy, convert the Kilowatt hours and it came to a lot of money. She had to set up an on-death remortgage of her home to cover it even with the subsidies.

A typical human consumes maybe 3000 kcal of food per day. Which is about 3.5 kWh. Current price for electricity in the US is about $0.17/kWh. Do all the math, and you get an electricity cost of about $20,000 for a 90-year reversal, if the reversal consumes close to the metabolic energy spent. Which doesn't seem ridiculously expensive compared to what a human can save in their lifetime (ditto 10x that cost, if you imagine that it takes 10J to reverse the entropy of 1J of metabolism).

Are you imagining a much less efficient process?

The mechanics here are pretty similar to assassination markets.

Can you link to your comment?

My policy with microcovid from the very beginning has been to look at the numbers and basically ignore the "high risk / medium risk" designations, because they don't match my risk tolerance and that divergence has only increased over the course of the pandemic (now that I'm vaccinated, 1 uCov is less costly because it carries less risk with it).

Not from the very beginning, but for most of this year this is how I've used microcovid.

+1

I finished at 11:44:16 AM and placed #193, and I didn't really start until about 10:30AM. The puzzles were not very hard, so I infer that there were not a very large number of contenders.
 

I'm confused about this diagram. Is it plotting out activity preferences?

It looks like her objection is that the RaDVaC folks chose some pretty questionable peptides. Presumably you could simply order some different peptides, but I think you'll run into the following problems:

• You need to pick peptides that will, in the RaDVaC formulation, wind up folded similarly to their conformation in the live virus. I, personally, have no idea how to do that.
• You don't really have much evidence of immunogenicity for your new RaDVaC formulation and probably need to measure it again (my understanding is that the RaDVaC designers have done some immunogenicity measures in themselves, so the current formulation has some evidence of immunogenicity).