deif

Very interesting reply.

The summaries of all these studies can effectively be summarised as: if you are raising children on a vegan diet, ensure you supplement and have adequate calory intake. Taking datapoints from figures and graphs without understanding the underlying causes and effects is how we spread misinformation. It's great that studies are measuring this so that we understand better how humans can develop successfully.

An example of this is in study 6 where you stated that vegan children were shorter and weighed less. Whilst true the study also stated "The energy intake of the vegan children was consistently lower than the recommended daily amounts". It then concluded that with a sensibly planned diet vegan children should have no intellectual or physical problems in their development.

So whilst I agree that all the studies did find differences, I disagree that they are somehow proving against my points that a vegan diet in children can be healthy if correctly planned. Due to how the animal agriculture industry creates meat (such as supplementing and fortifying the meat) it is extremely easy to get away with not planning meals with an omnivorous diet.

I was going to write the exact same thing but framed in the opposite sense - we should apparently lower the bar for humans and class certain ones as non-sentient.

Why don't you submit a PR with a more up to date list? Or fork it? Lists don't get solved magically and a single person cannot keep up with all projects although your Privacy Guide seems to do a good job.

I find it quite amusing that the package author refuses to act reasonably and states he wishes to spend no time on the project, whilst being pulled further into the project. If he simply willingly engaged with the project owners to resolve the situation he could avoided:

1. Spending so much time trying to get the project to stop what they were doing.

2. Peacefully come to a mutually beneficial arrangement.

3. Front page HN where I will most certainly be avoiding using any project the author is part of.

Because it's a global currency not reliant on the US dollar? Not everything is about perfect decentralisation too, third parties can run decentralised infrastructure so it's verifiable by users of the network.

That's fine, you don't have to use it. A lot of people do prefer to use it for payments and receive payments in it though. They don't want a middle-man bank and would rather their transactions were trustlessly sent and received.

At it's core cryptocurrency is a way to bypass banks if one was so inclined. Specifically currencies like Monero allow a person to send and receive payments completely anonymously, hence its increased usage on darknet markets.

Well that is completely wrong and you clearly haven't read any documentation on the network upgrade.

The never ending cycle of monopoly vs convenience. Let us forget the fact that exclusives make the game devs more money than they would've got otherwise and the games are eventually released on steam anyway.

Can you come to my meetings and tell my CTO how to make decisions faster?

My thoughts exactly. A site dedicated to a craft that is then filled with hundreds of poorly rushed articles rather than a few good quality ones without being invasive is contributing to the shitshow. I wish that there was an alternative index that valued quality rather than gamification of the crawlers.

It's comparable to Google's charge and only slightly more expensive than other merchant providers.

I still consider it quite extortionate however considering app devs are adding to the ecosystem and potentially driving sales.

I think that these gripes are insignificant compared to the main claim that the platform is dying. I'd advise to not make bold statements such as 'a token in the URL path is unconventional and prone to errors'. Is it prone to errors? As prone as putting it in a header or query param? I'd say that they're exactly the same.

'This is confusing, non-standard, and creates additional complexity'. Is it confusing and adding complexity? All you have to do is look down the list for what you want, it's hardly complex. It's not as if they're naming methods 'obtainChat', 'getUser', 'retrieveLogs', etc.

Which leaves the documentation on the website, which I find quite easy to follow. But let's say it is confusing and it's not as good as it should be. Does that mean the platform is dying? I didn't realise that designing an API to not use all HTTP verbs was such a big deal.

Ah I see, yeah the Plus plan lets you choose the storage. Professional works differently for some reason. I bet if you contacted their support they'd consider changing it though as it doesn't quite make sense as-is.