I think the problem is that buildings like you describe don't contribute to the city at street level. If the residental buildings are smaller then the gym, sauna, swimming pool will have to be in the neighborhood available to everyone.
I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic.
A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that.
The public sauna seems ok, but I've never seem any of that in the streets besides "erotic saunas" that are not really intended for the same purposes...
> I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic.
It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene.
> A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that.
This may depend on locality, but fair solution to that is allowing simple capitalism and more businesses. Someone gonna build second gym.
> It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene.
(Former) private pool owner here. I'd bet most public neighborhood pools are much more hygienic than a private pool where we'd only test the water when algae started growing. Public pools have proper maintenance and much better systems for chlorination/salt cleaning.
One thing I learned from friends in Panama: a pool comes with a pool guy and if it doesn't it'll quite literally convert into a cesspool all by itself. Pools need regular upkeep and that's a lot of work.
It’s not “affluent and sheltered” at all. My cousin just moved from Bangladesh to the Dallas suburbs, after having lived in Queens. I bet if I asked her how she feels about having a house with a pool now she’d say the same thing.
It is crazy how he was shocked he could have gotten metabolic disease by following the food pyramid.
Honestly, I thought everyone, but especially MDs, knew the food pyramid is complete and total bullshit in terms of health and was created by the food industry itself. Granted the food pyramid is now the food plates, but that too I thought was generally recognized as bullshit in terms of health and created by the food industry.
I also don’t understand as a practicing physician how he initially concluded diabetes is caused by obesity. Sure there is a strong correlation, but as everyone loves to point out, plenty of skinny people have T2D and plenty of obese people do not, maybe he just didn’t see that very often in his practice and his patients were skewed to mostly/only diabetics with obesity.
It’s also not lost on me that changing ones diet and removing sugars/carbs is simple but that doesn’t make it easy, which is just as much a part of his new study as diet.
I don’t understand people that admit removal of carbs/sugar can prevent 100% of T2D case even reverse some existing cases, but don’t advocate for those dietary changes because there may be some other cause to the T2D. Take Attia, he talks about reversing his metabolic disease/pre-diabetes through dietary changes, we all know what they were (any physician will tell you how that is done), but he doesn’t state once in the TED Talk what those changes were. The reason he doesn’t say it is probably the same reason I was down voted above, people don’t want to hear it. I’d love to see a study on why people get turned off, angry, anonymously downvote online anytime they hear the specific dietary changes that can prevent T2D or reverse disease/pre-diabetes/T2D like Attia did.
> Honestly, I thought everyone, but especially MDs, knew the food pyramid is complete and total bullshit in terms of health and was created by the food industry itself.
In respect of the carbs in particular, why would you think that?
Most countries have similar advice. For example, the UK NHS says a third of your diet should be starchy carbohydrates: "Base meals on potatoes, bread, rice, pasta or other starchy carbohydrates". This is broadly similar to the US food pyramid, despite no food industry funding.
The British Heart Foundation says try to eat "plenty of starchy foods such as bread, rice, potatoes and pasta".
People on HN say this stuff all the time and quote poor quality obscure studies, but high quality meta-analyses frequently find that diets that are 50%-60% carbs are healthy.
What is the alternative, credible source backing up this idea that carbs are harmful? It's only recently that the medical industry was saying all fat is bad - and much of it still is.
Clearly something is wrong with the standard western diet and processed foods. Refined sugars, carbs etc. may play a role in that, but the idea that everyone knows what's wrong and what we need to do to fix it is absolutely clearly NOT the case. Dietary studies are, by and large, low quality observational studies. Many doctors have little to no dietary training and operate largely on anecdata and educated guesses. The average member of public will know even less.
But it's far from clear that refined grains or sugars or anything else are causing the problem, and if they are, why they are. We know removing them sometimes helps, but that could be incidental, and if they are bad, why do we want to eat them so much? Plenty of diets were heavily based on carbs and refined sugar in the past and few people got fat or developed diabetes. Meanwhile some diets are very heavily fat and protein based yet they struggle enormously with T2D (see Tonga where spam, mutton flaps and other low quality meats are heavily implicated in their awful obesity problems). Some people blame fructose in HFCS, but Europe doesn't use fructose to nearly the same extent and is suffering the same epidemic of metabolic syndrome (albeit a decade or two behind the USA). Sugar intake has actually been decreasing for decades in the UK, while obesity/metabolic syndrome/T2D is continuing to rise enormously. For all we know at this point, it could be plastic pollution or a virus causing this problem.
FWIW I have cut out carbs as much as I can from my diet due to the doctor saying my carb based diet was damaging my liver, and started eating cheese, as my diet of whole foods and beans/chickpeas/lentils cooked from scratch has triggered a gut disease. I've had to stop being vegan as a consequence, despite many other vegans I know being healthy, happy and thin on a similar diet to what I had before. Yet other doctors in the past commended me on making the healthy decision to be vegan. I'm relatively certain nobody knows what's going on. Maybe food is just tastier now so we eat more of it...
> What is the alternative, credible source backing up this idea that carbs are harmful?
I didn’t say that, you read that in.
However, as it relates to T2D as I stated there is not a single case where the patient did not chronically spike their insulin levels through consumption of carbs/sugars. I’d welcome you to find any study or record of a single T2D patient that did not consume carbs/refined sugars.
Similarly, I would welcome you to present a single study or patient on record successfully reversing their diabetes without changing their diet to reduce, if not eliminate, carbs/refined sugar.
There are hundreds if not thousands of studies on reversing diabetes, I’m link just one. The study notes that reversing T2D isn’t a goal in modern medicine rather management. But it’s also noted that prior to development of insulin, low carb diets were the prescribed treatment/management of T2D and it shouldn’t come as a surprise it is the very thing modern studies are finding reverses T2D. So low carb diets go back at least 100 years to pre-insulin treatment and are not new as many like to pretend.
If it were plastics like you suggest, I find it odd that T2D can both be avoided and reversed with similar dietary approaches minimizing carbs/refined sugars. But maybe it is, again that can continued to be studied, but in the meantime we have a working solution to avoid 100% of cases.
Still I am not demonizing carbs, it’s possible that at least some people can manage them just fine. However, on the other end of the spectrum dating back thousands of years, first documented by Egyptians, carbs/grains/sugars have been used as tools to fatten up live stock. They cause high blood sugar, they overwhelm and fatten the liver, and they trigger the production/release of insulin which is a hormone that tells the body to enter a catabolic state and store energy in fat cells.
It reminds of a coworker, a frontend developer and Linux user. He asked for a macbook pro from his employer, and after using it for a year he switched back to Linux. He said it was because he missed using it.
I use Linux primarily because of ideology, but luckily it's also the best OS out there, for me at least and many others.
For others Mac OS or Windows will be better for them, and that's fine.
> I have to strongly agree with your last point - I also never understood the massive hard-on that the technical user-base has against useful telemetry.
I think it would be far less hostility if we as users got access to the information ourselves. E.g. I would think it would be very useful to see stats on which features I'm using in firefox, how often, which features I'm not using, how many tabs I have (compared to the average user) etc., and I would be much more happy to share that data with firefox if I can see it first.
> I think it would be far less hostility if we as users got access to the information ourselves.
Go to about:telemetry
There are several pages detailing all of that information, and you can also get all of that data as the JSON payload if you want to munge and display it yourself.
I didn't know this existed - thank you for sharing. I've shared telemetry on Firefox, but wasn't sure exactly what was being sent so this helps quite a bit more.
I don't think it lists 100% of them. For example, I think there might be one that forces a crash for debugging purposes? There are definitely some that are used for displaying errors and things (eg about:httpsonlyerror).
Windows is doing well in this regard in that 11 (and some earlier versions of 10) includes a 'View diagnostic data' button in settings that starts duplicating shipped-off telemetry to the local disk for inspection.
> Launched with the code-name Project Lenix, AlmaLinux is an open-source, community-driven project that intends to fill the gap left by the demise of the CentOS stable release. AlmaLinux is a 1:1 binary compatible fork of RHEL® 8 and it is built by the creators of the established CloudLinux OS.
This is what open source is all about. Personally I don't need it, but I love it.
That's not the same thing, it's a whole different thing to do a "rpm --rebuild *.src.rpm" and to actually take a upstream source package it with a spec, patch it to make it compatible with other things in the distro and test them in different setup.
The challenge anyway is not to rebuild packages or make packages it is to actually maintain the build farms and the build tools.
source: i work for Red Hat (not doing any packages work tho) and I used to work for Mandrakesoft on Linux-Mandrake when we were basically rebuild Red Hat rpms to our flavour.
I totally get that, but I meant more in the philosophical sense. For instance many other build farms in the world have compiled the linux kernel before it got to redhat.
Nice wording by Nvidia. Linux has an unstable/ever changing internal API and Nvidia need to update their out of tree driver for the new release, and probably every release.
Nvidia is trying to put the blame on Linux, but Intel and AMD don't have these issues because they open sourced and upstreamed their drivers (for AMD they mostly did), which is the way to work with open source.
Linux has always been fighting an uphill battle, but as it becomes more and more relevant it is becoming increasingly difficult to fight against it. Intel understands this, and AMD understands this.
The wording by Nvidia is telling for how they view Linux I think. In fairness it's probably very costly for them to go open source (one time cost at least).
The specific wording was "Linux Kernel 5.9+ is incompatible with current and previous NVIDIA Linux GPU drivers."
So it's not the driver that is incompatible, it is Linux. And that led to the grandparent comment asking if Linux people are "deliberate to fuck with nvidia".
If nvidia had said "our driver is incompatible with the newest Linux kernel" then we probably wouldn't been having this thread.
This comment is very weird. For Linux users it is definitely better buying an AMD discrete graphics card than Nvidia, and it has been for an eternity. Just google "torvalds Nvidia" as an example of how the community feels about Nvidia. Is it even possible using Nvidia cards with Wayland?
Nvidia has a history of problems in Linux. I can still remember having to log out of my X session just to change monitor layout; which is something you do alot with a laptop and external displays. Took them several years to fix!
I've experienced intel boards where I had trouble getting anything but the newest fedora with custom kernel parameter to even get the installer running. But most of the time intel has very good upstream support, so it is normally a pretty safe bet.
With AMD there are sometimes delays getting full support for a new generation upstreamed (e.g. hdmi audio and such), so it is usually good to Google for Linux reviews first.
In general AMD has superb open source support for their cards, if not immediately at launch, and I recommend them for Linux users who want the least amount of hassle.
I've seen people recommending Nvidia to Linux on YouTube (and now here), and I honestly think it's a disfavor to anyone interested in Linux.
An alternative subscription model that I've always liked is Linux Weekly News (lwn.net) which publishes all premium content openly after a week behind paywall. (In my mind I like to call it "Freshwall", ie. paying for fresh content.) News quickly gets old after all.
How successful is it as a model for cash flow compared to the others? I can wait a week to see the kernel benchmarks or whatever so I don't see why anyone would subscribe if not to suppose it rather than need it. I never used the site I'm just assuming it's like phoronix.
I unfortunately don't know any details other than it seems to be working. The content they have is highly in depth, and the comments section is excellent.
My experience was that I started reading the articles as a non subscriber. Because I enjoyed it I began visiting the site more and more. After some time it started to annoy me that I had to wait to read the latest content, and that's when I started subscribing. These days I read it less frequently, but I still subscribe to support the site.
It's the closest one gets to an electric work van, for sure, but it's pretty small. It's more comparable to e.g. a Fiat Doblo (sold as the strangely named Dodge Ram ProMaster City in the US).
Next to a proper work van like a VW Transporter or Toyota ProAce, you're looking at less than half the load volume (~4.2 m^3 versus ~9.5m^3).
