There’s a few ways you can tackle this with various degrees of rightness.

First of all, your door looks to be hung upside down. That’s not going to affect the fit of the door but it is going to put your doorknob at an awkward height.

Your best bet is probably going to be to go get a new, pre-hung door, and replace the entire thing, frame and all. It’s really not that hard, just kind of fiddly getting everything squared up properly. You can probably get it done for less than $200, and a few hours of work with a friend or two.

Second best bet is going to be to square up the existing frame, get yourself some shims a prybar, and some nails, pull off all the trim, and set it right.

In my experience, trying to get a new door to fit right in an existing frame is always kind of a pain in the ass. It sounds like more work, but it’s usually worth it to go the pre-hung route.

There’s lots of guides and YouTube videos on how to do all of that.

Least right- start modifying the door and/or frame so they fit. Cut, plane, chisel, and/or sand the door and frame down until they fit. Yes, the door is probably hollow, but you should still have probably about an inch or so of solid framing around the perimeter of it to work with. There’s a good chance if you go this route you’re going to find it looks kind of wonky and you’re going to wish you did one of the above options.

You could always of course pay someone to do it the right way. Shouldn’t be terribly expensive, I’m a cheapskate and will DIY most things, but I have a personal dislike of installing doors, so it’s something I’d be willing to pay for.

Depending on how you can rearrange furniture, how much wall space you have next to the door, etc. you could also go with barn doors and just bypass the crooked frame entirely. I hat barn doors, I think they just look bad in pretty much all cases, but they’re popular for some reason and pretty straightforward to install.

Depending on your tastes and how much of an actual barrier you need, may also be able to get away with bifold doors, a curtain, cafe/batwing/saloon doors.

The zest has a very concentrated flavor, but not really any acidity.

However, ook into “super juice” it had a moment in fancy cocktail circles somewhat recently as a way to get more citrus juice from less fruit and also a product that will last longer in the fridge without the taste degrading.

Basically you peel your citrus, mix the peels with some powdered citric and malic acid (the ratio of acids depends on which citrus, I think lemon juice gets straight citric, lime and orange get a mix) and let them sit for a while, the acid pulls some of the oils and such out of the peels making “oleo citrate”, then you blend the oleo citrate and peels with water and strain out the solids and you’re left with something that is nearly identical to actual juice (and you could, of course, mix in the actual juice from the fruits as well)

I feel like there is probably something there you could work with to punch up your juice a bit. Maybe if you’re able to separate out the oleo citrate you could use that as sort of a citrus extract. Or if you just want more acidity and don’t need the flavor enhanced you could just add a bit of acid to the juice.

One of my favorite scary facts about the moonies that I don’t see talked about much is that a couple of the founders sons had a falling out with the church, and went and started their own, even crazier church. They made the news a few years back doing some rifle blessings and some kind of mass wedding ceremony (also with rifles)

Not for nothing, they also own kahr firearms

The issue people are worried about is that no one is making the decision to kill kids, it’s the AI making the call. It’s being given another objective and in the process of carrying that out makes the call to kill kids as part of that objective.

For example, you give an AI drone instructions to fly over an area to identify and drop bombs on military installations, and the AI misidentifies a school as a military base and bombs it. Or you send a dog bot in to patrol an area for intruders, and it misidentifies kids playing out in the streets as armed insurgents.

In a situation where it’s human pilots, soldiers, and analysts and such making the call, we would (or at least should) expect the people involved to face some sort of repercussions- jail time, fines, demotions, etc.

None of which you can really do for a drone.

And that’s of course before you get into the really crazy sci Fi dystopia stuff, where you send a team of robots into a city with general instructions to clear it of insurgents, and the AI comes to the conclusion somehow that the fastest and most efficient way to accomplish that is to just kill every person in the city since it can’t be absolutely sure who is and isn’t a terrorist

There was one team fairly recently that thought they had developed one that got a lot of press, but it turned out to not be true.

But that was only for that one specific case, it didn’t prove that room temperature superconductors can’t exist in general, there are still other teams working on developing them, and theoretically they could be possible, we just haven’t quite worked out what materials will exhibit superconductivity at room temperature, under what circumstances, and how to make them.

And we have some materials that come pretty damn close, Lanthanum decahydride can exhibit superconductivity at temperatures just a few degrees colder than some home freezers can manage (although at very high pressures)

I don’t really like that they seem to be floating the idea of adding ads to the mix, but as long as this stays a separate part of the service from the on-demand section, I don’t exactly hate it.

I’ll occasionally have parties where we’ll use Pluto or similar services just to have something on. Usually something like the The Asylum channel to have a stream of something going that we’re not really invested in but that we can comment on and go “what the fuck was that‽” once in a while, and kind of do our own little MST3K thing.

And sometimes you just kind of want something on in the background while you’re doing stuff, and I know I’ll sometimes get a little bogged down trying to choose what I want to have on even though I’m not really going to be actively watching it.

I remember once upon a time there were some people who really wanted Netflix to add a “random episode” option, I wasn’t really one of them, but this could kind of fill that niche.

Also, if they curate it right, it could be kind of a cool way to drop new episodes. Say a new episode of a star wars show drops at midnight (or whatever-o’clock) For those who care to watch it immediately as it drops, they just need to be tuned to the star wars channel and it will come on automatically, no having to refresh and hit play. And leading up to the new episode they can do a mini marathon of relevant episodes from other star wars shows and movies that will help you understand what’s going on in the episode, maybe even create some new content summarizing content from the books, comics, and video games, etc. sort of an extended “last time on…” segment for the new episode. I’d also want it to be immediately available on-demand when it drops, but it could be kind of a good way to get yourself back up to speed about what’s going on in the show.

So there are ways this could be a cool addition to the service. Whether they actually use it that way is another matter entirely.

For a while, there was a meme on Reddit that went “This is bullshit - you’re oversimplifying a complex situation to the point of no longer adding anything useful to the discussion.”

It was somebody’s answer to an askreddit post asking “If you could only post the same one sentence to everything you wanted to reply to on reddit, what would your sentence be?”

People like you are the reason that answer resonated with enough people to become a meme.

The US is not blameless for what is going on.

However, ultimately Israel is the country that is carrying this out, if people like Netanyahu and his cohorts weren’t pushing for this, it wouldn’t matter how much money, weapons, and other support the US gave them, this wouldn’t be happening.

If the US pulled all support, Israel could and almost definitely would press on with it, probably not as efficiently as they are currently, but still the war would continue. Maybe the US pulling support would lead to a quicker end, maybe it would just drag things out, maybe it would lead to extreme escalation with a desperate Israel choosing to use their nuclear weapons either against Hamas or against other Middle Eastern nations that choose to get involved without the US acting as a deterrent.

The US helped create the circumstances that allowed this to happen, but the fact that it is actually happening is on Israel.

mental health checkups for repeat offenders

This one, I think, is particularly huge.

I work in 911 dispatch in the US, we have a lot of repeat callers, and it’s probably no surprise that a lot of them have drug, alcohol, or other mental health issues.

It happens a lot that one of them will finally do something that gets them hauled off to jail or to a psych hospital or whatever, they get out, do ok for a little while, then relapse, or stop taking their meds, or otherwise fall back into their old patterns and they’re back to causing issues for another few months, years, etc. until they again do something they can be brought in for and start the cycle again.

Making sure, in some way, that they’re following up on whatever treatment, counseling, etc. they need after they get released could be huge for a lot of them. There are some programs in place, but it can be hard to ensure they’re actually sticking to them, and of course there are usually money, time, and transportation issues they often need to overcome to stick with them as well.

CPR alone usually wont bring someone back, but what it does is buy time for them to get more advanced treatment that might.

There’s some exceptions, things like asphyxia and drowning have a pretty decent chance of bringing the person back if it’s done properly and promptly. In things like opioid overdoses it can buy you a couple critical minutes for cops or the ambulance to get there and shoot some narcan up their nose and then they’re back on their feet in no time flat.

I’m a 911 dispatcher, I’ve talked people through CPR countless times over the phone, I have very little confidence that most of them were doing it properly because CPR really is pretty brutal, I’ve taken a lot of CPR classes over the years, and every instructor I’ve ever had has mentioned that if you’re doing it right there’s a very good chance you’re breaking ribs in the process. Unless you’ve actually had training and have an idea how rough it can be I doubt that most people are going to do it hard enough out of fear of hurting the patient.

I’ve luckily never had to do CPR in person myself, although I was once on-scene while it was being performed. I was at a party, someone came inside said they think someone died out front, I went out to see what was going on, came around the corner of the driveway and my friend was already doing CPR on a guy laying in the street who crashed his motorcycle. I know my friend also had CPR training so I let him keep at it, I stood by to relieve him in case he got tired and started counting to make sure he was keeping a good rhythm. I of course know my share of cops, firefighters, EMTs, etc. who have had to do CPR in their line of work, but I don’t exactly press them for any details about it, but I talked to my friend afterwards to make sure he was OK, and he talked about how he could really feel the guys ribs popping as he was doing it.

It was also a pretty good illustration of the bystander effect, when my friend got outside there was already one or two other people pulled over with the accident but not really doing anything, not checking on the guy, not on the phone with 911, just kind of standing there. If you asked them, I’m sure they probably would have said they were blocking traffic with their vehicles or something, but that doesn’t really do any good when the guy needs CPR immediately.

I admit I only skimmed the article, and I haven’t been keeping up with the day to day goings on over there, but off the top of my head even if there is a ceasefire in effect I can think of a couple reasons they might still be doing it

They want the ceasefire extended, or are prepping for another ceasefire further down the line after things resume

General raising awareness

They believe one or both sides aren’t holding up their end of the ceasefire agreement and want to hold them accountable

They’ve now pivoted to the next issue regarding the conflict, like what can be done with the time the ceasefire has bought, what the next steps should be after it ends, how to bring about an end to the war, what should happen after the war, etc.

The question posed was whether farming dogs is worse than farming other animals, and that is the question I attempted to answer.

The question was not whether farming any animal for food is ethical or justifiable, and so I didn’t attempt to answer that.

In general, predators like dogs are a very inefficient way to get calories. Cattle, for example, have the benefit of turning stuff like grass that we can’t eat into something that we can (meat,) dogs on the other hand, largely tend to eat the same sorts of foods we would, so often we could just eat those foods and cut out the middleman

Now dogs are not totally obligate carnivores, theoretically they can be fed on a vegetarian diet, though it requires some careful planning to ensure they’re getting the right nutrients, you can’t just turn them loose in a field to eat grass and expect to get much out of it, by and large they’re going to need to eat the same sorts of food we’d eat- a variety of fruits and vegetables. They can also possibly fed byproducts, scraps, offal, overripe or damaged produce, etc. that is unfit or less desirable for human consumption, but that still adds a lot of complexity to managing their diet, and if animal products are part of the feed it potentially means you need to worry about spreading disease between animal populations, don’t want to be feeding your meat dogs on mad cow brains or avian flu chicken bits.

And as you move up the food chain you can have issues with bioaccumulation of toxins like heavy metals. Say from birth to slaughter a cow absorbs 1oz (pulling that number out of my ass) of lead and mercury and such that ends up in its various tissues. Cows are big, you have to eat a lot of cow to absorb that much lead and mercury from eating them. Now let’s say a dog during it’s lifetime eats the equivalent of one whole cow (again, pulled out of my ass) during it’s lifetime. That dog now has that same 1oz of lead and mercury, and dogs are much smaller so it’s at a higher concentration in their meat, you don’t have to eat nearly as much dog as you do cow to get the same amount of heavy metals.

If we’re going by proximity, there’s some Caribbean nations that are even closer to the US than the Falklands are to Argentina, would you argue that we should annex Cuba or the Bahamas?

And from what I understand, the people of the Falklands overwhelming want to be a British territory. I think that’s probably the more important consideration.

It is wild that it came to be the way it is. It certainly doesn’t make sense to me in the world before modern air travel, the internet, etc. that they’d be ruled by a country so far away, but in this modern era where just about anywhere in the world is only about a day’s travel time, or available on-demand 24/7 by phone or computer, it makes every bit as much sense to me that they be a UK territory as it does that Alaska is a US state.

Hawaii is actually a pretty interesting comparison to make, because most Hawaiians did not want to become a US territory at the time, but that’s really begging a whole 'nother discussion with lots of complex talking points about imperialism/colonialism, indigenous rights, etc. but I’m frankly just not going to go into that right now. Suffice it to say that it’s similar in the sense of it being a small island territory located far from the colonial power that laid claim to it, but the attitudes of the people living there were very different.

I’m no historian or anything of the sort, so take my thoughts on this for what it’s worth (and I am certainly biased being an American, don’t exactly get a whole lot of Argentinian history books to study, and most of the Spanish I know is food-related, so if someone wants to enlighten me more on the Argentinian side of things, I welcome the education.) But in general my understanding is that the British were the first people to land there, didn’t really do much with it at that time, and pretty much just said “finders keepers”

Maybe worth noting, there were no indigenous inhabitants there, so that’s probably about as ethical as colonization can get.

Then France showed up and set up shop since the British weren’t doing anything with it. Britain came back and also set up shop, and it’s not totally clear if either of them even knew the other was there. France eventually decided to fuck off, and let Spain have their bit of the Falklands.

Spain and Britain coexisted for a while, had some scuffles, but more or less worked things out. Eventually Britain pulled out to focus on other things but still considered their “finders keepors” claim to be valid.

Spain eventually pulled out as well, so for a little while no one was really doing much of anything with it officially.

Argentina (technically Buenos Aires at the time if we want to split hairs, I’m going to just use Argentina and Britain to keep the sides easy to follow) comes along, and decides it’s theirs, and this is pretty much the root of the dispute. While Britain still held their claim of “finders keepers” Argentina countered with “losers weepers”

Argentina gave some German dude permission to set up a colony for them there to fish and hunt feral cows. Eventually he gets into a fight with an American navy captain over fishing and hunting rights, Captain America kicks their ass a bit and declares the colonial government disolved, and pretty much continues on his merry way. Argentina tries to get things there started back up again but never quite gets their shit back together in the Falklands. A little while later the Brits come back around, still claiming finders keepers, and take charge of everything again, and this time the colonies stick and continue to grow. Argentina spends the next hundred years or so muttering “this is bullshit” to themselves.

Around the 1960s, Britain starts talking about decolonizing, and Argentina gets excited thinking they’re going to finally get the Falklands. Britain even quietly floats the idea of giving them the islands, figuring the Islanders would just kind of accept that decision if it was made, and running these islands from halfway around the world was getting kind of expensive. Turns out though that pretty much everyone on the Falklands is pretty damn happy to be British subjects and don’t really want to be part of Argentina, which made things a bit complicated.

Argentina gets kind of impatient with all of this, and eventually decided “fuck it, we’ll just take them ourselves,” Britain cannot abide Argentina’s inability to wait patiently in the queue and was starting to really wrap their heads around the idea that the Falklands would rather stay part of Britain and so we get the Falklands war.

Britain wins, Argentina goes back to muttering to themselves, and that pretty much brings us up to the present day.

I have no idea what the antelope situation is in Kazakhstan, but sometimes culling is necessary. Populations can rebound, and if there aren’t enough predators or suitable habitats left, they can even reach a point where they’re damaging the environment.

I live in Pennsylvania, a bit over a century ago, white tailed deer were in bad shape here from overhunting and deforestation. There was even one man who believed that he may have shot the last deer in Pennsylvania.

The state implemented a lot of regulations to help the deer population recover, and now we have tons of deer, and in some cases it’s more than the environment can support.

Local to me is Valley Forge National Historic Park. If you spend any time in the park without seeing deer you must have your eyes closed.

And that was a problem. With no predators and no hunting allowed in the park, there was nothing to keep the deer population in check. They over-grazed and destroyed a lot of vegetation, which negatively impacted lots of other animals in the park, and even the deer themselves since there wasn’t enough food to support the population. I vividly remember seeing lots of sickly-looking deer in the park when I was a young child.

About a decade or two ago they started a deer culling program which has done wonders for the park environment, more and more varied vegetation, new trees have a chance to grow as well as other plants, which in turn improved things for other animals in the park, and the deer are healthier as well.

Now in an ideal world, we’d have predators and an environment to sustain them and let nature manage itself, but that’s not always feasible unless we start actively relocating people, bulldozing developed areas and replanting forests (which I’m not exactly opposed to, but it would be a tough sell for anyone being relocated by such measures)

A deer will spend pretty much it’s whole life within about a one square mile area. A few little wooded patches and fields and you can sustain pretty solid deer populations in the middle of suburbia. Wolves on the other hand have home ranges of over 50 square miles, and often over a hundred, or occasionally even over 1000 miles. That kind of space is a lot harder to find.

I suppose he could call for another crusade or maybe dispatch the Swiss Guard to the region. /S

Somewhat more seriously, though not something I’m actually suggesting or would necessarily want to see, he is a head of state and a prominent public figure, it wouldn’t be out of the question for him to play a role in some sort of negotiations as an intermediary or something.

He also has the ears of potentially every Catholic in the world, as well as non-catholics who may want to hear his perspective, and while I’d personally very much rather the church mind their own business and not get involved, he could potentially give guidance to them about how they should feel about the situation, what they can/should or should not do to help, what they should be asking of their governments, etc.

Again, I personally would rather the church keep out of it, but those are some options available should people feel that the Pope should involve himself.

I love that video because it really shows how casually a lot of people will embrace racism/antisemitism, but I also hate it because Throw the Jew Down the Well is kind of catchy, and is probably going to be stuck in my head now

So don’t get me wrong, I fully support this kind of measure.

But there’s potentially an argument to be made that there is an issue (or more likely multiple issues) that isn’t being addressed properly that is leading people to choose to smoke. It’s well known to be harmful, addictive, and frankly doesn’t have many upsides. What that bigger issue could be is kind of up for debate- is it a failure of the education system or health system not doing enough to educate people about the harm and risks? Is it a mental health issue leading people to choose self destructive behaviors or possibly a conscious or subconscious attempt to self medicate those issue? Is it a societal issue like peer pressure, portrayals in the media, people emulating role models, or just plain old rebellion? Is it due to regulations or enforcement being too lax?

Whatever it is, there may a root cause that isn’t being sufficiently addressed that makes people choose destructive behaviors like smoking, which makes smoking a symptom of that bigger issue. And what other vices are those same factors pushing people towards? Maybe addressing those kinds of underlying issues the right way might do more good than just getting people to stop smoking, maybe we’d kill 2 birds with one stone and also make headway on other substance abuse issues, or gambling addictions, etc.

Now again, I’m totally in support of this kind of regulation. Sometimes you need to treat the symptoms before/while to treat the underlying disease. But we need to be sure we’re looking at it from both angles.

Teeth have always kind of struck me as something we could eventually not just replace or regrow and make as good as new, but actually replace with something better.

Teeth are, by their nature, subject to a lot of wear and tear, corrosive environments, have a lot of nooks and crannies that need to be cleaned regularly, etc.

How fucking cool would it be to have some sort of cyborg teeth made of some material that won’t wear down, is more corrosion resistant, stronger than your natural teeth, etc? You could use your teeth as a bottle opener with impunity, or do everything else your parents always warned you not to do with your teeth.

I’m certainly no doctor or material scientist to suggest what the ideal tooth replacement material would be, but imagine having some kind of titanium alloy super teeth that would never wear down, corrode, or get cavities no matter what kind of neglect or abuse you subject them to, and are purposely engineered for easier flossing, may e even more efficient biting and chewing. Sure, the Jaws look isn’t everyone’s aesthetic, but some of us might consider it a worthwhile trade-off.

In the meantime though, this is damn cool if it pans out.