Phoenix wrote: ↑
- I have trouble following Margus/Waffa's portions of the discussion due to a linguistic or cognitive barrier, and I think I wasn't the only one. It's a bit burdensome, since it was quite a significant portion of the stream time.
He is Imperial Highness. I was able to follow him (unlike his writings, which I only make sense of when I am high myself)
Well, you also already once imposed a 3-month ban for His Imperial Highness to zip it, except for expressing his consent to this particular ad hoc ban (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=191&start=70#p5150
). This wasn't just the problem of following somebody's form of expression, this was to prevent active harm from somebody expressing themselves. Further, the mere fact that the Facebook chat had to transition to 2.0 due to certain aforementioned influences highlights that there may be something there. I myself don't see a big distinction between verbal and written-down communication, at least not in this case.
Much of the live Twitch chat were, to be frank, really harsh in their comments regarding Margus/Waffa's portions that took significant portion of the air time. Anyway, my point is not to be rude to him, just to report outsider perception of what I thought would be a continuum of broadcasts. I suppose it's clear this won't be the case any more.
Phoenix wrote: ↑
- MS-DOS took way more than a couple people to make, the history starts from CP/M made by a different company, then to QDOS (Quick & Dirty Operating System) propagated by Tim Paterson to test new processors, then onto Microsoft from IBM etc, so it was really an incremental work done by a large quantity of people collaborating on different parts... but then again this is a minor detail.
I made that up. Sorry for that. Also the "break bricks with dick" example was fictitious (afaik) and intended for entertainment value only. Smoking excrement was real, as was Dragon's abilities and tricks mentioned and featured.
Sure. I picked this particular one because most people are not aware of the specific history of how MS hijacked the DOS-system. I wouldn't expect the "DOS made by couple people" comment to be intended for entertainment, but as a statement of a fact for analyzing software development process. I guess the line between a joke and a claimed fact is a bit hazy, so this wasn't intended too seriously. Just something that happened to catch my ear when mentioned out loud.
Smog-infested cities are a good example of how inhaled particles are not good for a person.
What kind of research do you have on that?
Inhaling foreign particles and its effect on human body in various forms of adenocarcinoma has a long history, and it's prevalent in pretty much any data I've come across (this does not necessarily have to imply cancer; other respiratory diseases are prominent):
- I currently have open a patient data set of several hundred Dutch bladder cancer patients, for whom all analyses have to be adjusted for their smoking status (bladder cancer is the second most affected type of adenocarcinoma after lung via smoking). The smoking status correlates heavily with both the invasiveness (muscle) of their cancer (and thus prognosis, i.e. their cancer is more aggressive) as well as prevalence.
- As a Finn, I'm sure you're familiar with the dangers of carbon monoxide (häkä). I personally know people who have died to the foreign molecules occupying the normal transition of oxygen in the human respiratory system - a very practical example of what these simple molecules do to your red blood cell based oxygen circulation. Carbon monoxide remains among the most prominent suicide methods in the modern world, and when gas-based stoves were prominent in e.g. UK, this was one of the main components in both accidental and intentional deaths in otherwise safe homes:
- Carbon monoxide overview: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/carbon-mo ... poisoning/
- Suicide via domestic gas, a sharp decline in the UK: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147403?seq=1
Further, to illustrate the severe effects that foreign filaments can have on the respiratory system (via chronic inflammation and occupational hazards), we have the infamous asbestos, which I believe is banned in most countries; literature spans thousands of publications, with a naive search landing 15k papers to choose from:
- I interact with dozens of colleagues from all around the world; one distinct feature that people appreciate in Finland (and Nordic countries in general), is the air (which we ought to protect btw). Cities such as Delhi or Tehran (which have happened to be over-represented among the people who I've spoken with), are prone for such effects; partly because the smog is trapped in a "mountain pocket" and cannot disperse. I personally have visited multiple times in Denver (CO, US) for research, and it's so sad to see the smog covering the metropolitan area from up the Rocky Mountains. During unfavorable winds, it accumulates in the city and causes hazardous health effects. Wildfires that had just occurred last year when I visited Denver had only made things worse:
- Tehran: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4516430.stm
or https://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/m ... evels.html
- Delhi: https://time.com/6061/delhis-air-has-be ... -about-it/
or https://weather.com/science/environment ... lity-index
- Denver: https://patch.com/colorado/denver/denve ... port-finds
or https://www.westword.com/news/denvers-p ... s-11623470
I tried to pick the sources from a variety of political spectrum sources, to showcase it's not just some specific wing's agenda. These 3 locations are just cherry-picked based on my personal experience and direct interactions with them.
- The literature between air pollution (inhaling foreign particles) and increased risk of respiratory diseases is vast, non-country specific, spans all age groups, and is not temporally or spatially limited. Just for cancer, there are hundreds of hits in recent publications; if we then expand the search criteria e.g. to general respiratory problems, we'd be looking at tens of thousands of publications all the way from 1950s. Some recent examples, showing that non-tobacco smokers are affected world-wide (highlight here on 'non-tobacco smokers', as to indicate that they are exposed to foreign particles unwillingly):
(example publication by a Polish research group)
Just for adenocarcinoma (a histological subtype of cancer) and air pollution, see e.g. (hundreds of hits):
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?te ... ocarcinoma
Just for general cancer and air pollution, see e.g. (almost 10k hits):
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?te ... ion+cancer
Just for respiratory diseases and air pollution, see e.g. (15k hits):
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?te ... ry+disease
PubMed is a curated abstract indexing source of peer-reviewed publications, so above hits are just a "scientist's limited search engine". So there is potentially a much larger literature out there outside of its indexing scope.
The US Clean Air Environmental Act was prompted by the Donora incident already in 1948 due to adverse particles in air. This went through the Congress during an era when tobacco companies were lobbying heavily against connecting adenocarcinoma and inhaled foreign particles. An example recent review is available at (the incident itself is widely known and they connect the incidence's effects on legislation to the on-going increase in airborne particles in China and India):
We can delve deeper into cancer epidemiology if you'd like (I'm more into oncology rather than environmental hazards), but I don't think it'd change the opinion for either of us or would be very effective use of our time.
To be honest, it's a person's choice to smoke or not - and I've even been thinking of picking it up myself, because of pessimistic nihilism and general self-imposed anti-natalism. The main reason I haven't done this has been to avoid exposing nearby people (kids, spouse) to smoke, to whom I feel responsible.
Air pollution on the other hand, is not a person's direct choice (if we don't count the possibility to move from e.g. a polluted area to a non-polluted area, or from an asbestos-built house to an asbestos-free house). So there I see a greater responsibility for people to consider the wider health effects. However, these two are certainly related; one is more acute and local (smoking), while other is prolonged and spans a wider perimeter (pollution).