Take a 1000 marbles, different sizes. Colour them randomly, red or blue. Throw them in a bag.

Take 100 marbles. Colour the largest halve red, the other halve blue. Add them to the bag.

Statistically, with sufficient sampling, an outsider will be able to measure the difference in average size, red group of marbles vs blue group of marbles.

But if you’re a marble meeting another marble, knowing their assigned colour gives you very little information on if they’re bigger or smaller than you.

Maybe now they can shift to more ethical business models?

You can’t honestly expect that?

The modelling approach involves several steps, beginning with the development of bottom-up national trajectories, followed by a comparison of the ambition levels of the national trajectories (…). Using data from the literature, target level corridors for key indicators such as heated living space per capita or passenger-kilometres per capita were defined, with a minimum floor, among others, shaped by decent living standards 9,10 and the maximum on 1.5

It’s a different usage of the phrase “bottom up approach” than I’m used to.

From the title I expected: grassroots initiatives that are expected to convince a sufficiently large amount of people, and have a large impact on carbon neutrality.

What the article seems to describe instead is a (1) top down, sim city like, approach to life. Where the authors assign an allowance to each sim (2) And then sum the individual allowances.

Part (2) is indeed, a bottom up approach. Just not the one I expected.

NPCs don’t mind

Not really an answer to your question, but I’ll share my approach. Youtube channels have rss feeds, so you can “subscribe” using any rss reader, and don’t need to login.

So I just use firefox with the following addons. A seperate youtube container + adblock + in-video ad skip + age verification skip + feedbro as rss reader.

Put a ring on her cause she’s loaded

Feynman answering “Why is ice slippery”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

Why are you not disturbed by the fact that when you push down on a chair it pushes you back?

I expected this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36GT2zI8lVA

Ah, you’re viewing it as a timetravellers’ dilemma.

My view was more that we’re an observer in the lagrangian solution to the differential equation we call life. The electron, being a constant in the equation. Remove the electron, you alter the equation, therefore destroying known life.

The reverse, actually.

I’ve since found help at an institute that specializes in my particularities, I’m happy to share.

I’m learning to be kind to myself, too. Slowly.

I detect you therefore you’re no longer a wave.

How could you destroy 2, if there’s only one?

We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.

We all understand the point. But it’s important to question the source. It suggests a gullability, or fabrication.

Do you work in that field?

Scapegoat tree ftw

Love those too!

Delightful!

I’ll keep my eyes open for those next spring

Oh the colors