I see no citations in the video description and I’m not too interested in listening to their argument if they can’t provide those citations up front. The only measure they seem to be appealing to in order to support their claim that “no one wants to live in Canada” is that Canada has lowered in happiness index. But, by that measure Canada is 15th in the world and USA is 23rd. So, if that’s the main reason to think people don’t want to live in Canada, then people really don’t want to live in the USA. On its face, that strikes me as exceptionally untrue.

6x7?

How’s this for a plan:

1. build high speed rail
2. build more housing (especially single dwelling) that is not corporate owned
3. tax more heavily income from real estate conglomerates to fund 1 and 2

I think The Lancet is a reputable journal. They seem to have conveyed the findings of this article well. With quotes from the authors as well. Seems like an adequately scientific article with very little exaggeration. So, by my standards I wouldn’t consider it click bait.

Good idea in principle. Do peer-reviewed journals only count as credible? If not, what is your proposed criteria?

Here’s a transcript to peruse if anyone is interested. Then you can search for keywords to see if they were mentioned, quickly flick through Putin’s rambling and you avoid providing Tucker with a click. Here’s also an archive link if anyone prefers that.

Interestingly enough, I had thought the rumour that his wealth came from an emerald mine his dad owned, but it does seem to be the case that that his dad only claimed to have part stake in an emerald mine, it was apparently in Zambia and not South Africa, and there doesn’t seem to be any credible evidence that Elon received any substantial money via this route or even any evidence of the existence of this mine. I think Snope’s investigation, which corroborates the aforementioned debunking of rumours about Musk, was done pretty well: https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/11/17/elon-musk-emerald-mine/

PS: Whether or not Elon Musk is a nepo baby born with a silver spoon in his mouth does not impact whether his propensity to say and do unhinged things and perpetually confabulate about the prospects of his companies. e.g. Thunderf00t’s many videos

I was completely naive to 3D printing 6 months ago, got a Prusa mini, got printing. Pretty simple. Great explainers on the prusa website. Easy installation and intuitive software. I recommend it.

Here’s the graphs of all objects in the universe.

Here’s the figure legend: Masses, sizes, and relative densities of objects in our Universe. Time-dependent background densities are color-coded as in Fig. 1. The diagonal white dashed isodensity lines correspond to the intersections in Fig. 1 of the vertical isochron lines with the black density line. Gravity and quantum uncertainty prevent objects of a given mass from being smaller than their corresponding Schwarzschild radius [Eq. (6)] or Compton wavelength [Eq. (7)]. Schwarzschild black holes lie on the black m∝r diagonal line which is the lower boundary of the “forbidden by gravity” region. The masses and Compton wavelengths of the top quark (t), Higgs boson (Ho), proton (p), electron (e), and neutrinos (ν) are plotted along the Compton (⁠m∝r−1⁠) diagonal line. Among these, the top quark has the smallest Compton wavelength, because it has the largest mass: 173GeVc−2⁠. The smallest possible object is a Planck-mass black hole indicated by the white dot labeled “instanton” (Ref. 20). Its mass and size are (m,r)=(mp,lp)⁠. The smallest observable (not yet evaporated) primordial black hole (PBH) that could have survived until today has approximately the same size as a proton (Ref. 21). The large low-mass black dot in the SMBH (super massive black hole) range is the 4 × 106 solar mass black hole at the center of our galaxy (Ref. 22), while the more massive large black dot is Ton 618. The dashed horizontal line at m=mp emphasizes the orthogonal symmetry of black holes (⁠m∝r⁠) and particles (⁠m∝r−1⁠). Our Universe is represented by the “Hubble radius” and has a mass and size that places it on the black hole line, seemingly suggesting that our Universe is a massive, low-density black hole (Sec. III A). The black rectangle containing neutron stars (“NS”), white dwarfs (“WD”), and brown dwarfs (“BD”) indicates the size of the parameter space plotted in Fig. 3. Less comprehensive versions of this plot can be found at Refs. 20 and 23–28.

If Toronto tries, learn from Vancouver’s failed trial.

un-paywalled