Just having time in the evening to cook isn’t enough to get home cooking done. You need the energy to do it too, availability of fresh ingredients, and consistency in your schedule to allow planning ahead so that it’s actually economical to cook at home.

I say we blame the system for these problems. Parents can always do more, but it’s never clear if the outcome outweighs the cost, so I wouldn’t blame them for making the choices they do.

Is it actually secret like how the Epstein Island is secret, or “secret” in that no one pays any attention to it because it doesn’t cater to us?

My preference is Holfood (Chocolate). Canadian company, produced in Toronto. It has a nice flavour and isn’t too filling.

Compared to other nutrition shakes I’ve tried in the past:

• Soylent powder and Holfood Vanilla are both very similar and taste very artificial. It’s not what I would call “bland”.
• Boost and Ensure: They’re always way too sweet (I would not be able to consume more than maybe 300 Calories worth in a day), and much more expensive than the alternatives when you consider the nutritional value.

And also having to check OS compatibility for every package you want to use.

The ply count doesn’t reflect thickness or softness at all. Of the 3-ply toilet papers I’ve used at home, some need three layers to not fall apart on the first wipe, others are fine with a single sheet.

Not only does she got this, she’s being extra efficient by moving two pieces of furniture at once!

It’s either all or nothing. Anyone who imperfectly tries to make the world a better place is just virtue signaling.

OP actually did write 0.10, but I think it’s pretty clear from context that they meant it with one sigfig.

Why does even-ness matter?

Because significant figures.

0.1 means you have a margin of error of ±0.05 (i.e. the true value is between 0.05 and 0.15).

0.08 means the margin of error is ±0.005 (i.e. the true value is between 0.075 and 0.085).

OP’s question can be rephrased as “how did we obtain a value to this level of precision?”

100 failures + temporarily borrowing someone else’s success also looks like 1 success from the outside.

I feel the same. The only times I (intentionally) down vote are for things like spam or people throwing insults around with zero substance. It’s basically a button for increasing/decreasing visibility, and you get much more interesting discussions when it involves views you disagree with.

Same price or cheaper? Then sure. Variety is good.

Speculation: If you tax them, then there’s an extra step to take that money and pass it on to billionaires. Make a mistake and some of it may get used to benefit the plebs. But if you make them illegal and threaten a much worse fate, then that lets the billionaires exploit them and directly benefit from their presence.

How would you know anything about my internal motivations?

There’s no point arguing with someone that interprets “I read the logs” as “I don’t read the logs”.

We’re working on getting it to fill your pantry and do all your chores.

“Gabe is a good billionaire” is a possible reason to make that claim. The other is to remind people to be mad at the datacentres gobbling up all the hardware. The latter seems to be how everyone is interpreting it based on the other comment chains under this post.

I think they’re basically saying that if the kitchen staff spits in your food and doesn’t tell you, then you wouldn’t care. It’s only when you find out that you care.

I think it’s more likely that they measure success by how much improvement they bring to the lives of the people they care about.

So, why were they dumping all of that food?