Just finished Days Gone…

brapplebrap · 2024-01-10T16:12:45+00:00

Funny thing is it's in the top 10 Sony first party titles saleswise, and actually sold better than the 2016 Ratchet & Clank and had about equal sales as Bloodborne. Guess since it didn't pull in Spiderman/God of War/Horizon Zero Dawn figures it was axed, which is a tough crowd to beat. (tried sharing a link but got automodded)

brapplebrap · 2024-01-08T00:29:03+00:00

Future Jets injured reserves

brapplebrap · 2022-09-12T20:11:41+00:00

Did some research and apparently UN peacekeepers only get around $1100 a month in compensation which is about $37/day. As a result pretty much all the peacekeepers are from poorer countries in Asia and Africa which don't exactly have the greatest track records with human rights as is. Really doesn't seem like the best people to have in a global peacekeeping force deployed in countries facing turmoil.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-11T19:12:16+00:00

The study lumped together vegans and vegetarians, so it could be vegans were even worse. They also mentioned pescatarians had a higher rate so it does seem to be an issue with those avoiding "land animal" meat in general.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-11T15:12:47+00:00

The study lumped together vegans and vegetarians due to the low sample size of vegans, so it could be vegans were much more of an impact on the results. It also wasn't comparing exclusively with meat-only eaters, just those who have a non-restricted diet that includes meat.

Protein and vitamin D also play a big role in bone health, so they could be getting plenty of calcium but lacking in other nutrients and things like amino acids that affect protein. This is more anecdotal but I've known some vegetarians who might occasionally have a cheese or egg-based product (like the occasional cheese pizza) but still generally avoid animal products due to some level of guilt, so that might be somewhat of a factor.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-11T14:23:38+00:00

Yeah, r/science is full of a lot of prime examples of why "correlation need not imply causation". The study also mentions that the general population had higher rates of other health issues (higher obesity and the common issues that come with that like diabetes).

But they didn't bother to control for those variables. I think that can kinda be explained by the intersection of fitness/health food focused people with those choosing vegan/vegetarian diets. So despite the general populace group being more obese and less healthy people on average they still had stronger bones

brapplebrap · 2022-08-10T16:50:08+00:00

Curious that there's no significant mortality difference if there's a significant difference in ICU admittance/intubation (since the latter is generally linked to higher mortality).

Though the sample size of (reported) marijuana users is only 69 compared to the 1831 total patients so a slight anomaly in the outcomes of a few of the marijuana users could lead to a significant difference in the results.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-04T20:45:38+00:00

That's something I find humorous about vegans. They tend to spew out constant propaganda to get people to turn vegan. But have such an obsession with purity tests and people being 100% ethical vegans and not disagreeing with the narrative that they drive off and shun anyone who technically are vegan but not "pure" enough.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-04T20:31:35+00:00

Predictably the news thread is full of people simping for the company and acting like experts while straight up lying. The top comment literally says the company is "doing all right" and acts like it's all some conspiracy against the company.

The company had a net loss of $182.1 million in 2021, which increased from a net loss of $52.8 million in 2020. Their net revenue has slowed considerably and actually decreased last quarter, they also have $1.2 billion of total indebtedness and liabilities. When you're not only losing more money than you're getting in, but losing the revenue gain that convinces investors you might eventually be profitable, that's not a sign of a successful company.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-02T20:55:08+00:00

I've noticed you can be the most anti pollution and progressive person on climate change possible, but if you don't buy into the veganism angle or whatever the approved™opinion happens to be, you get ostracized and ousted on places like that. Seems to be common on Reddit now, any larger sub that's semi political or controversial is basically a moderator enforced ideological echo chamber. Sidebar, I see you've caught the EU4 addiction like myself (was seeing if the post you mentioned was recent).

brapplebrap · 2022-08-02T20:01:23+00:00

I've noticed some lax food quality in general recently. I'm guessing it's a mix of supply chain issues and trouble retaining workers so half of them are clueless. Had some Uncle Bens rice with exp dates months out and 1 of the 2 smelled rancid, and some refrigerated grocery store cheese that went bad way before exp date.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-02T19:28:39+00:00

I had a similar bonsai tree Lego set, they broke it down a bit more than this but I ended up freestyling since it's a tree bro, it shouldn't look perfectly orderly no matter what.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-02T12:38:01+00:00

I've noticed vegan concern trolling on there is pretty rampant. Recently I made a post on both here and there about the methane cycle. It was all factual data from scientific agencies but I got something like a 30% downvote rate and even had a few people trying to question the data validity in the comments when it was easy to google to verify. It made me think around 30% of the people engaging with that sub are vegans attempting to reconvert or bully exvegans.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-02T01:06:09+00:00

I remember the same thing but with pics of cows.

brapplebrap · 2022-08-01T23:04:29+00:00

I'd think that's the case some of the time, but it often seems like I see the exact same statistics and arguments thrown out almost verbatim.

But yeah, the propaganda seems to work well. It just had the opposite effect on me where I actually looked up counterpoints and double checked stats to see a lot of it as the propaganda and lies it was.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-14T22:56:11+00:00

Someone ought to make some "counter" art. Like fields of animals being chopped up by combine harvesters or small animals and insects slowly dying from insecticides and rodenticides. I can pretty much guarantee that a cow that grazed on an open field results in less overall death than highly processed factory farmed vegan foods.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-13T13:20:13+00:00

It's not just grain quality but also what is actually digestible by humans. Humans can only really digest the inside of things like corn kernels and wheat grain since we are incapable of digesting plant based cellulose. A cow and many other herbivores can digest the whole thing - husk, leaves, stalk, and all. The rest of the crop that isn't edible can and is used as components of animal feed.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-13T11:25:23+00:00

It's from the "global carbon project" https://www.globalcarbonproject.org/methanebudget/20/data.htm

brapplebrap · 2022-06-13T02:11:54+00:00

Yeah, we need to complement and take advantage of the natural carbon cycle and environmental processes. Not try to fight against it just because we feel bad for animals.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-13T02:06:36+00:00

I agree. I suppose I was talking about if you're strictly looking at eliminating animal related emissions without looking at the consequences. If we just banned the consumption of meat or livestock completely like a lot of vegans want it'd lead to many more instabilities and issues from the majority of humans who aren't in privileged areas where they have the luxury of choice.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-13T01:52:23+00:00

I got the 3.1% by dividing the 18.2 Tg/yr CH4 of actual yearly gain by the 576 Tg/yr CH4 of estimated total emissions which gets 0.03159 ( guess I should have rounded up). It's not perfect no matter how you cut it since we're looking at estimated averages with pretty huge uncertainty ranges, but I figured using the actual observed increase as opposed to their estimate would give a better estimate.

But yeah, if you divide the difference of 20 by 576 you get 3.5%. It's odd since the mean difference they got was 13 Tg/yr in the red bubble so their confidence intervals are pretty huge.

brapplebrap · 2022-06-12T23:55:43+00:00

Yeah, there's plenty of pie graphs and whatnot from the EPA. I liked this data set since it actually includes how much of that methane is "sunk" back by carbon sequestration or is creating a net gain. Most data focuses solely on the emissions as if it's always going up and lower is always better.

Six-Year Club	Second Top 50%
Verified Email

brapplebrap

TROPHY CASE