cwmma

perusing his blog posts, basically if a calculation is at all within expected values, this is evidence of MOND, but for something to be evidence of dark matter it has to jump through quite a few hoops in his opinion.

He also seems to have the same problem that many MOND proponents have which is arguing for MOND in blog posts instead of in papers, though he doesn't seem to be as bad as others in this regard.

> DF2 has consistently been portrayed as fatal for MOND despite consistently being shown not to be a problem. I’ve given up writing formal papers showing this, as nobody cares. They just hear what they want to hear, which is that MOND is wrong. Indeed, after the 2018& incident I swore off doing so.

This should set off crank alarms when you read it.

If it was environmental then you'd expect it to fluctuate over time, but they also checked it against an animal they knew to be cold blooded, if it was environmental you'd expect them to be the same, but that animal was calculated by the same method to be colder.

I don't actually think Xenon-124 being radioactive was a surprise. All the publicity related to observing the decay for the first time is phrased around 'hey we observed something that's very rare' not 'hey this thing happened we didn't expect to happen'.

Which seems to point even more towards, scientists have a pretty good handle on which ones are radioactive.

Probably not, they have a pretty good handle on why atoms decay, to the point they can predict some to be radioactive before it's actually observed to be (like Bismuth-209).

Also even if something is REALLY REALLY long lasting, you can still check for the halflife by observing enough of it, they've been able to rule out proton halflives under 10^34 years (the universe is on the order of 10^10 years old) but by observing enough protons (like say 50,000 tons of water) you would expect at least some to decay.

Ironically, most of the metal stuff doesn't survive from antiquary. For instance most statues were in bronze not marble, but since metal can be easily recycled the only metal statues that survived are from ship wrecks.

A lot of libertarian dogma is based on classic homo economicus 'lets pretend people act perfectly rationally' type theories that just really break down when confronted with how humans actually act.

Is there a term for a product which is really only really for a minority of it's users?

Air travel seems like this as most airlines and manufacturers seem to bend over backwards for their wealthy and high margin passengers and basically treat economy class as "fine I guess we'll throw the rest of you in the back"

Mobile games seem the apotheosis of this as a lot of games are really about finding whales and any enjoyment anyone else has is really an accidental side effect.

They might not have a choice is the problem, there has been a pretty successful campaign to get credit card companies to cut off payments to anyone even remotely connected to this kind of stuff.

they just lost a case in Europe about being trademarked

First off business are taxed on profits not revenues, so a money losing business doesn't pay taxes.

Second if there is something that causes undesirable side effects (like a data center) you want to tax that activity specifically so the Corp with 8 data centers pays more then the Corp with 1.

If you can't tax the outputs you tax the input.

So force then to pay more for electricity or water either through direct taxes or by forcing them to subsidize other users.

If you write an article about Zabka stores and what's unique and interesting about them I'll probably read it.