Seems like you'd just lift up the mattress like they did for this picture.

What exactly did they mean by "germ-free"? Over half the cells in our bodies are non-human microbes.

There's no such thing as a "Republican state," nearly every state is split somewhere between 51/49 and 60/40. There are "Republican-run states," but inside every Republican-run state is a "Democrat-run city" which has been a convenient narrative for Republicans of late. Houston's mayor is a Democrat, and Harris county has more registered Democrats than Republicans; in 2024 metro Houston voted for Kamala over Trump.

Whether Abbot or Whitmire is more to blame for Houston's violence is just a political distraction. Both bear some responsibility and I'm tired of both sides running finger-pointing narratives rather than trying to find constructive solutions.

Thank you for this thoughtful and nuanced take on the subject. It's sad that constructive discussion around population is often shut down due to the link between eugenics and population control. It's often assumed that anyone advocating for lowered population is in support of similarly dystopian/authoritarian policies, when increasing access to birth control and education has the same effect while increasing personal agency.

I would also note that the theory of evolution has been used to justify all kinds of absurd ideologies, yet we don't have a problem accepting its basic tenets.

If we accept the fact that humanity is in a state of ecological overshoot, and that overshoot is a function of population x consumption, then it's entirely reasonable to want to address both sides of the equation.

If "Find my phone" still works when it's turned off, then yes, phones are definitely traceable when powered down.

According to this study, an income of $38,000/year puts you in the top 10% of carbon emitters. This study puts it at €42,980, or about $50K USD. That's a little higher than the median income in N. America, Europe, and Australia.

That said, carbon emissions are just one way humans impact the environment; other facets are far less variable (we all produce about the same amount of human waste per day, for example).

I lived without a cell phone for about 3 years (2022-2025), and once in a while there was a small hurdle but overall it was surprisingly easy. 2FA can be done via text/email, I never ran into an instance where I needed an app. Every ticket I bought could be printed at home, so it takes a little more forethought but not a deal breaker. Never ran into any parking stations that couldn't be paid via a kiosk/card, but YMMV.

These days I own a phone per request of one of my business clients, but it stays turned off at home unless I'm on a job. Once in a while I'll break it out to use the GPS but most places I drive to I can find by memory. There are many "middle" ground solutions out there too (like Graphene OS), but as a general rule, I would make a habit of leaving your phone at home when you can, and definitely when engaging in anything spicy.

If you'd bought silver (or silver ETFs) a few months ago you would have made a whole bunch of money, and society hasn't ended yet.

Sorry about that, I pasted the thumbnail URL instead of the article URL. Post is updated.

Not sure why you got a downvote, this is absolutely true. If you have a low SSC you may be subject to travel bans, reduced employment prospects, being barred from attending certain schools, increased surveillance and police monitoring, and public shaming. Other individuals can also have their scores lowered by interacting with you.

Same with Google Workspace. Just got an email last month saying prices are increasing to reflect "new AI features," all of which I have disabled because (A) I don't use them, and (B) they're another privacy nightmare.

At this point we're all just subsidizing the shareholders. The vast majority of generative AI being tacked on to subscriptions is useless, it's just corporations jumping on the hype train to boost their stock price.

Carbon Brief published a great article on this subject: Q&A: What does deep-sea mining mean for climate change and biodiversity loss? Some takeaways on its impacts:

• A 2020 study stated that “scientific misconceptions are likely leading to miscalculations of the environmental impacts of deep-seabed mining”. It added that the disturbance from a single mining operation “could easily be” up to four times larger than its direct mining footprint, affecting up to 32,000 square kilometres over 20 years.
• The potential cost of restoring damage to deep-sea ecosystems could be “astronomical”, according to a report by Planet Tracker, a not-for-profit thinktank.
• A 2022 UN Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEPFI) briefing paper saw “no foreseeable way” in which the financing of deep-sea mining could be consistent with a sustainable blue economy. It called on investors to instead “focus efforts” on reducing “the environmental footprint of terrestrial mining” and “support the transition toward a circular economy” to make current mineral demand “obsolete”.
• A 2023 study found that deep-sea mining “is unlikely to resolve the sustainability challenges in the conventional mining sector” and any environmental impacts avoided on land “would be at the expense of economic benefits in mining-reliant” developing countries.

Deep-sea mining can also harm marine organisms that are crucial for climate regulation – those that store carbon in the seabed or produce oxygen in the deep ocean.

• A 2024 study found that polymetallic nodules may be responsible for producing oxygen at the seafloor in the CCZ. The authors said that this oxygen production could be critical for sustaining life at the seafloor.
• A 2025 Nature study provided a rare insight into some of the lasting impacts that mining can cause. It focused on a 1979 mining experiment in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. During the 1979 test, a mining machine drove grooves into the seafloor. These furrows, which were almost one metre deep and up to three metres wide, looked much the same after 44 years. These impacts are consistent with findings in other surveys of mined test sites.

Seafloor mining vehicles emit toxic plumes of sediments that can impact marine life in the midwaters, from reducing their ability to communicate and causing physiological stress, to forcing species to migrate. Species that could be impacted include sharks, dolphins, whales, squid, fish, shrimp, copepods and jellyfish.

True, but consider that a huge amount of retail investors' portfolios are tied to the S&P 500/NASDAQ. Think retirement savings, IRAs, 401(k)s, pensions, etc. Then consider that the entire market is effectively propped up by AI right now (see: The entire stock market is being carried by these four AI stocks). If the market gets a 60% correction, it's going to be the middle class losing their shirts all over again.

Yeah, Kim Stanley Robinson likely did his homework on which parts of the world were most likely to experience the first heat wave with mass casualties.

That "someone" is pretty much everyone's stock portfolios/pensions/retirement plans, as about 60% of stock market gains in 2025 have come from AI megacaps. The "magnificent 7" make up about 35% of the entire stock market at this point, and they're all heavily invested (overleveraged) in speculative AI. When this bubble pops it's going to be nasty.

You could see it as a modern form of animism, or pantheism/panentheism. I actually subscribe to the latter as it seems clear that matter is an emergent property of consciousness (not the other way around), but I would ascribe AI as much consciousness as the silicate minerals it's derived from. Sentience can only truly be self-identified so we do have to go off the honor system to some degree, but if we look around at everything else that self-identifies as conscious, AI doesn't even remotely resemble it.

This is an absolute travesty. The NCA5 was some of the most comprehensive data on climate change in the US, and included sets of projections for multiple degrees of warming. This erasure (and the termination of scientists working on the NCA6) is a huge blow to anyone looking to build resilience in this country.

I had a feeling this was coming, so I pre-emptively archived both the data sets and the reports. You can access them with the links below:

• Reports (Google Drive)
• Reports (Proton Drive)
• Data (Google Drive)
• Data (Proton Drive)

You can access a snapshot of the page here; I've also posted analyses of this data (along with interactive maps) here, here, and here.

This is all great stuff to have on hand, but not relevant for OP's question. They're wondering how to prepare for the equivalent of the dotcom burst or the 2008 recession, not a grid-down scenario.

If you ride a bike even remotely seriously, your bike is not cheap… It might not be expensive, but you quickly realize why cheap bikes are cheap.

Spot on. I've got about $3k into my bike, but it's not a fancy race bike (it's a steel fixed gear), so I invested in bombproof parts that could end up outliving me. Once a year I'll replace the tires/chain/brake pads, service the bearings, and strip/regrease a few parts, so the running cost is maybe $15/month. If you've got a road bike with a 2x drivetrain, or if you're paying people to service your bike that might go up to $30/month, but still negligible compared to a car.