THE DUMBEST BOY ALIVE. PRETTY GOOD, EPISODE SIX. YouTube video by Jon Bois

youtu.be/eECjjLNAOd4?...

…did they originally claim that the answer was “fake” for every method???

Did they correct this at some point? I just played, and was confused by the “% correct” numbers. It didn’t make sense that only 27% of people chose true for “smoking”, especially.

yeah, that totally makes sense. I have no idea what regions I will pick, but I don’t think I could force myself to complete barrows without a teleport to the chest, or do gwd without a teleport to the boss rooms. I will probably take evil eye.

megamind: no last recall?

also:

and there’s no way I’m picking clues. I’ve been burned too many times before, thinking “maybe clues will be fun and worth it this league”. they never are.

this is really close to my first thoughts after seeing the relics, except I was leaning alacrity over evil eye because the concept seems fun. I am unsure whether to reload T5 or T6.

I feel like I would get more from butler in the long run, but transmutation is too cool to pass up

are there any relics that everyone generally considers too weak to pick this time around?

…is flow state a trap, or are there some creative things it lets you do that I’m not realizing? on first look, it reminds me of equilibrium. hard to get excited about faster xp vs a choice of any other relic

oh my god this looks incredible. osrs must have the best community-made qol tools in existence

uh oh, oh no, I can actively feel the hours of my life being by jagex like justin timberlake in In Time (2011)

I thought I had gotten osrs’ hooks out of me, but seeing this post activated the task-spreadsheet part of my lizard brain… planning for leagues is so much fun

dear god… the whole pod, trapped in the orb…

why ignore l’Acadie? Quebec is not the only province with French as an official language, nor is it the only Francophone identity

I read this in the thick Transylvanian accent of a vampire who’s trying to come up with a convincing and relatable human anecdote

The Kiss Plan - Nirvanna the Band the Show YouTube video by Kitsch

youtu.be/KupraCQ5nOY?...

Jay, open for all.

Matt, open for business.

“Now c’mon, let’s go to the game……… so we can do the *kiss* plan.”

If you think the most pressing issue of our time is that there are too many humans… what are you suggesting should be done about it?

But if you still believe that population *per se* is the main problem… what do you suggest we do about it? Because there’s not a single “solution” to that “problem” that is compatible with any world I want to live in.

…because the Canadian government chose to enforce sustainable practices. So many of these problems are structural questions of social organization first and foremost.

None of the unsustainable practices you describe are necessary functions of population, and many were worse in the 20th century when the global population was much smaller! The Atlantic northwest cod fishery completely collapsed 30+ years ago, and it’s nearly restored to sustainable levels…

A relevant example: forecasts that AI data centre power consumption in the US could be equal to 22% of all household consumption by 2028.

Is that a necessary function of population growth, or a problem with the way power is distributed, the way people have decided to organize our society?

This is why focusing on ‘overpopulation’ is empirically wrong, without even getting into how ethically fraught it is, the kind of dehumanizing and eugenic policies it invites.

…while, sociologically, we don’t have any reason to believe that the planet’s population will continue to grow exponentially to some truly impossible to sustain number.

I wouldn’t speak exactly in absolutes like that: lots of conflicting, complicated, various factors drive global consumption.

If you want my two cents, developments in sustainable, green tech that are capable of supporting the planet’s growing population have made huge leaps in the last decade…

I didn’t claim that, that was someone else. I was only ever responding to this statement:

“resource consumption rose 3.5x overall, but only 1.7x per capita. That means that it increased 2.1x due to population growth alone.”

Which is not a statistically valid claim.

This isn’t meant to be a realistic model of population and consumption, but to illustrate why your original formula was statistical malpractice. You simply don’t have enough information from those two statistics to justify your original claim.

…but when you look at the actual data points, the growth in consumption was entirely driven by the #1 consumer, and not driven by population growth *in any way*. I believe this math is basic as well.

I was imprecise in my wording before - I shouldn’t have said “top X%” I should’ve said “top X”, referring to an absolute figure.

Here is a mock dataset that demonstrates my point. The population size doubles, and the final statistics are roughly the same as the ones you cited…

It’s entirely possible to reach these same statistics by only increasing consumption by the top X% of consumers, over a period of population growth.