During the covid period, the price of hand sanitizer, which is thickened alcohol, rose to exceed the price of drinkable alcohol.
Several beverage factories proposed to rework themselves to produce sanitizer instead, which would have been good for everyone.
But they couldn't, because federal law would have required them to poison the sanitizer, which would have contaminated their machinery so badly that they would have been unable to switch back to producing drinkable alcohol afterwards.
So - even if we ignore the idea that intentionally poisoning people is wrong - there was a serious cost to the legal regime, one that still exists.
This is false. Several breweries and distilleries started producing sanitizer basically overnight [0]. The requirement to add denaturing components to alcohol was suspended during the pandemic specifically to allow it [1].
Can't you just tell your AI tool of choice to just port it? One thing I like about AI is that now I can easily roll my own or take an open-source project and customize it really fast with very little commitment on my end. Instead of everyone having to use the exact same tools, now we can customize it to our liking--at least for now
Unfortunately, political violence seems to be en-vogue these days. I even hear people in "real life" casually discussing their support for it. What can we do? I think the only thing we can do is push back on it, even though it doesn't seem fair. What's a favourable alternative? You do a great job here giving individual feedback, which I know some people listen to and take in. I hope it's some kind of comfort to know that you can change people's minds, or at least give them some pause. In today's algorithm-driven world, pushing back seems more important now than any time I can think of. We need cool, level-heads running things.
I mean, if they are using more AI and less of the devs who made it what it is... it might be better? A little tongue-in-cheek, but I find jira and confluence much less annoying now that I just made a claude skill for each of them and now I don't have to interact with their UI very often anymore
Wow, I wish I read this guide months ago when I was trying to research split keyboards. It would have been a lot easier to see what the options are. I eventually settled on the nocfree keyboard and have been relatively happy with it. It definitely helps by letting me split the keyboard very wide and open up the shoulders and back (slightly wider than shoulder distance). It feels like everything these days is trying to squish our shoulders/back into a hunched position. As someone with back issues, I have to mindful of my posture. Split keyboard + adjustable standing desk is great for the scapular area and the lower back for me
> If I can get distracted from my real world tasks anytime, anywhere, the immediate incentives to work on real things disappear. Effectively, one can get stuck in a local minimum.
> I don't know how to solve it, ...
> but personally I've chosen to block as many feeds/algorithms as I can, ...
I think you solved it :) (at least, for yourself)
There are many things "out there" that are addictive and distracting and thus unhealthy, but we all have to find some way to overcome
Thanks for your positive response. It's true, we all need to help each other in finding community and human connection again amidst the waterfall of "content".
It's taken a few years to get to this point, but seeing the effects and regrets from over consumption of feeds made me take action.
Actually, especially for smaller breweries, carbon filtration is extremely common. It still removes chloramines, pesticides, and other off-flavor compounds, and is much cheaper than an RO system. It's true that it won't change the hardness of the water, but if you have naturally soft water you can just add minerals, if needed for the style
Activated carbon will remove the larger chain PFAs, but is not as effective as removing the smaller ones. From the paper:
> Conventional water treatment employed at municipal
drinking water treatment plants have been shown to be nearly
ineffective at removing PFAS. This can leave the burden
and cost of implementing more sophisticated water treatments
to brewers unless public water suppliers implement tertiary
treatment to remove PFAS from finished water prior to
distribution. Anion exchange and activated carbon treatments
have been shown to more effectively remove longer-chain
PFAS and PFSAs but were less effective in removing PFCAS
and the alternative shorter-chain PFAS and PFECAs.
Reverse osmosis treatment showed significant removal of
PFAS of different chain lengths in drinking water, but can be
prohibitive due to high operational costs and energy usage.
In areas with known contamination, beers from macro-
breweries were less likely to have detectable PFAS than craft
beers brewed at a smaller scale, potentially due to more
effective and expensive filtration of tap water at larger
breweries.
reply