tjader

> Because I assume that you agree that eating 100 calories of Pop-Tarts per hour for 18 hours for 30 days, would give you a different result than eating 3 days worth of Pop-Tarts in a few hours once every 3 days for a month.

I agree that you would feel very differently in those situations and it's likely you wouldn't spend the same amount of energy unless you really make an effort to do it.

I don't agree that if you do make an effort to spend the same amount of energy you would have different results with regards to weight loss.

Yes it can affect what you do. That's the calories out part of the equation.

Nobody claims that the quality of what you eat has no effect on you, but every study shows that if you maintain the same calorie intake and expenditure it doesn't really matter how you consume the calories or how you expend it.

It is only thermodynamically impossible if you assume 100% efficiency in energy extraction from food, but in practice we only extract a very small amount of energy from matter. Thermodynamically you could extract ~10^12 kcal from a Pop Tart if you converted its mass into energy.

Not that I agree that for a human metabolism meal timing makes much of a difference in energy extraction, but it wouldn't be thermodynamically impossible.

> And OK, we'll draw a tile with all the buttons with greyed out status for that half second and then refresh to show the real status. Did that really make things better, or did it make it worse?

Clearly better. Most of the buttons should also work instantly, most of the information should also be available instantly. The button layout is rendered instantly, so I can already figure out where I want to click without having to wait one second even if the button is not enabled yet, and by the time my mouse reaches it it will probably be enabled.

> And remember, we're comparing this to just rendering a volume slider which still took a similar or worse amount of time and offered far less features.

I've never seen the volume slider in Windows 98 take one second to render. Not even the start menu, which is much more complex, and which in Windows 11 often takes a second, and search results also show up after a random amount of time and shuffle the results around a few times, leading to many misclicks.

But is this cache trustworthy or will it eventually lead you to click in the wrong place because the situation changed and now there's a new button making everything change place?

And even if every information takes a bit to figure out, it doesn't excuse taking a second to even draw the UI. If checking bluetooth takes a second, then draw the button immediately but disable interaction and show a loading icon, and when you get the blutooth information update the button, and so on for everything else.

That's the point. It's so bloated that an entirely local operation that should be instantaneous takes over 1 second.

I just clicked on the network icon next to the clock on a Windows 11 laptop. A gray box appeared immediately, about one second later all the buttons for wifi, bluetooth, etc appeared. Windows is full of situations like this, that require no network calls, but still take over one second to render.

It needs to rerender everything whenever you change any setting that affects typesetting. This used to be quite annoying when trying out fonts or find the best value for some setting, but recently they implemented a better way so that it first renders the current fragment (usually a chapter), releases the UI so that you can read, and renders the rest in the background. Page counts and some other stuff are broken in this meantime.

KOReader typesets the whole book at once. It is needed in order to get page counts right, for example.

I don't think it's just people who have willpower and discipline, it seems to me that for most people it doesn't take as much willpower and discipline to stay at a reasonable weight. These arguments make it sound as if everyone who is at a reasonable weight is there through large amounts of willpower and discipline, but most people I know don't need to exercise X times per week and constantly watch what they eat to keep that weight.

It's much easier when you can trust your body feedback and rely on your regular hunger signals, but for most people who benefit from Ozempic for weight loss if they just trust their bodies they will get fat.

If you need PIN or password, why are people so scared of giving out account numbers?

It is implemented in most of the world outside of the US.

It is scary that the info you need to deposit funds into an account in the US also allows you to withdraw funds from it.

'certainly not "best"' implies they are worse than at least one other country.