One watt-second.

As I told you clearly, not changing the clock kills MORE people.

So fuck yourself.

If you had any critical thinking skills, you'd realize that my original point applies not only to keeling over, but also to feeling unwell.

More feeble people would suffer throughout the year with either permanent DST or standard time than the current one bad night in March. (Which, BTW, could be totally avoided by planning ahead and adjusting your bedtime a few minutes per day in the preceding week.)

Biology matches DST adjustments more than a fixed clock. Most everyone woke up with the sun from the dawn of humanity until the late 19th century, and adjusting the clock for the seasons stays closer to that.

Then I suggest you never travel east or west by more than a few miles. You seem feeble.

Because of a coincidence. Sea level atmospheric pressure happens to be 101,325 N/m^2. That's not SI deliberately choosing units to be multiples of 10, it just happens that with the SI units defined for other reasons, one atmosphere of pressure ("1 bar") came out to be very close to 100 kPa, and hence with the density of water at 1, the approximation 1 bar per 10 m pops out.

You know what's aligned even more with circadian biology?

Keep the current system, get up off your ass, and change your clocks twice per year without whinging like a precious snowflake.

That way you you don't have to deal either with the sun beating down on you while you try to sleep at 4am or with your poor children getting run over in the dark on their way to school.

Sure, a couple of codgers might keel over in march, but they were probably gonna die soon anyway. It's much harder to measure the statistics of all the other people who would die steadily throughout the year due to the aforementioned issues, as well as similar problems caused by a static clock that doesn't adjust at all to when the sun actually rises. However, I would bet good money that it would add up to far more casualties overall.

For some reason, I seem to be in a small minority on this issue, though. It's probably because everybody would rather believe in a solution to the problems of living on a tilted axis that's clear, simple, and wrong.

People don't read a lot of things that they agree to, especially if it's 20,000 words in a postage stamp-sized text box on the new toy they just turned on. However, anybody who's not an idiot realizes that most everything in an agreement that they haven't read is against their interests, and plans accordingly. I personally always look for binding arbitration agreements and make sure to opt out of those whenever possible.

Oddly enough, the Anthropic TOS and privacy policy actually aren't all that obtuse and can be skimmed in a few minutes. They make it clear that they'll be looking for problems with what you upload and what kinds of problems those might be. Like I said, you can easily avoid all that by using a paper notebook for your diary.

If you look at Anthropic's terms of service and privacy policy, it clearly states that they can look at your content in order to enforce their usage policy. You have to agree to this when you set up an account or use their service. Given that this is an AI company, you can bet your content will be screened for violations more efficiently than if humans were involved at every step.

If she really didn't mean for anyone else to view it, she would have scribbled it down in a notebook instead of uploading into a cloud owned and policed by strangers and their robots.

Interesting. Sinkholes are, of course, a quite different phenomenon than bluffs being eroded away by the sea, but indeed, the pictures show the house being dangerously close to the ocean-side bluffs.

OK, basically you're saying you have no source for anything you say. Got it.

From reading the news as it happened.

The ability for originators to easily sell the loans was because they could easily make money from them. Which is what I said.

Except the main news tended to focus on the crisis of the banks and financial institutions making the loans, not the people receiving the loans.

Exactly.

You cite no sources, so I assume you're making this all up.

However, I guess it's also possible that you got your "information" from One-America Network, or some other source that made all their facts up for you.

The question was about sea level rise.

However, the kinds of multi-million-dollar mansions that celebrities buy aren't the rickety perched-on-the-edge-of-a-crumbling bluff houses built in the 30s and 40s. They tend to be built-by-high-priced-architects homes that had civil engineers to advise about the stability of the foundation.

The comment about celebrities came from the parent post I was responding to. My general belief is that we should ignore what celebrities do, but most of America seems to follow them obsessively, and a photo-spread of one People-magazine level celebrity is more important than any dozen climate scientists.

Yep. And, 2100 is a long way away.

Yes. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.insurancebusinessm...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arbol.io%2Fpost%2Fthe-...
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scrippsnews.com%2Fli...

It's a paper copy of underground utility records and a backhoe.