Guzba

It seems very different and critically important. Would we have a current obesity epidemic without "optimized flavor and marketing strategies"? Because if we would not, then that is the true cause and of fundamental public health importance.

If we would have an obesity epidemic even without "optimized flavor and marketing strategies", then it is totally irrelevant.

I am aware of this, I am more trying to get those that really believe it is as simple as calories in calories out to break free from that Plato-ey over-simplified explanation.

I agree, however for some reason calories in calories out is generally unquestioned among people I know personally.

With this in mind, is the real cause "calories in, calories out" or "optimized flavor and marketing strategies"?

Food design does seem like a higher potential explanation than many others offered.

If healthy home cooked meals are better, why is that? This is a non-answer.

It must be something about the ingredients (invalidating calorie theory) or it must be lower calorie (invalidating ingredient theory).

The orthodox reason for why people are overweight is calories in, calories out. Does it matter if those calories are a prepackaged cake or candy? In the end it is just calories.

Would gratuitously large steaks in the meat section and huge rotisserie turkeys instead of chicken at Costco produce the same result?

It seems strange to pick on certain types of foods unless believe those foods are the cause of obesity instead of just eating too many calories of any kind.

If you think cookies and candy are bad but other things are not, why? Is it that they are easier to over-eat? If so, how does that compound over time, given humans are trying to maintain homeostasis which includes a healthy set weight via satiety. Exercise induces more calorie consumption later. Over calorie consumption also induces lower consumption later. This seem like relevant factors.

This just begs the next "why". Why are people eating more now?

Such a significant behavior change across a large population is not well explained by "we just did".

I'm not sure fast food consumption or huge portion sizes is a great explanation. If fast food is the problem, why does that matter if it just comes down to calories? As for larger portion sizes, would even larger portions make us continue eating? Would tiny portion sizes make us all deadly malnourished?

Makes sense, thanks for the good reply.

Does absolute power consumption matter or would it not be better to focus on per-core power consumption? Eg running 6 32-core CPUs seems unlikely to be better than 1 192-core.

What's really exciting is that this suit is the type of thing that will only make the situation worse for smaller apps. More and more rules have been working so well for the Play Store I bet doubling them will really help.

I'm referring to companies financial statements where these numbers are reported. It doesn't mean the cash comp isn't high or that a specific job offer won't have a lot of cash comp.

What it does mean is that, in aggregate, Roblox has issued $1B in new shares to employees in the last 12 months, diluting shareholders by 4% or so. This is the most significant factor making the company cash-flow positive while remaining not profitable. It's essentially the same as investors putting more money into the business constantly.

Roblox is dilution-maxxing, stock based comp is up 10x since EOY 2020 whereas revenue is only up 3x. SBC is also ~ 1/3 of revenue.

It's pretty cool to get shareholders to pay your employees so you can be called "operating cash flow positive" as if their comp isn't an expense.

Fair enough! Tho I am curious what you mean by "especially for the money"?

The type of consumer buying an ASUS device is the type of consumer that thinks the spec sheet tells them how good something is. Eg, faster CPU and more RAM, or higher screen refresh rate or whatever is good regardless of any other variables or the package as a whole.

This means they are "some of the best Android phones you can buy", as in, they have some of the best specs per $ you can buy. Not that they are actually good phones.

It makes total sense someone could think they are great phones while they also have terrible software support since software support is not a simple hardware number on the spec sheet.

This is very like PC people that hyper-focus on a few metrics like CPU frequency since it is simple and numerical and easily compared, even if it is not actually sufficient to tell you much about full system performance.

Example ASUS phone description from enthusiast: "It's got good speakers, 2 charge ports, 165 refresh rate, optimal cooling, a set of ultra sonic buttons, ip54, crazy good battery, acceptable camera, storage is crazy high 256GB for 1 grand, 512 for 1.1 grand, 12G ram for 1k, 16G ram for 1.1k, can take 2 sim cards."