Barx [none/use name]

  • 0 Posts
  • 88 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 20th, 2024

help-circle


  • Harris has more or less the same solutions for black America, as this article lays out. Both parties offer false promises while supporting the material bases of oppression. Both parties are the parties of mass incarceration, criminal injustice, gentrification, school defunding, and ultimately, widespread material deprivation of the working class, the poor, the unhoused. We’ve had a Trump presidency. It was, despite liberals’ panic at rude statements, more or less, the typical status quo right up until the pandemic hit.

    This is not because Trump was good, it was because he did the same basic things as his predecessors and successor. Liberals temporarily cared about kids in cages under Trump and suddenly lost all interest under Biden, now pretending that it simply stopped because they aren’t hearing about it even as the Biden admin has ramped up imprisonment and deportations. Very little changed, materially. The same applies to the lives of black people. If anything, conditions have gotten worse under Biden through policies increasing unemployment, the normalization of the pandemic and ending of economic support during it, and the massive funds for cops, increasing criminalization of poverty, and decreases in universal funding, leaving communities subjected to the legacies of red lining and discrimination to self-fund. Fewer jobs, worse pay, less support, more observation and racially discriminatory criminalization.

    Expect this to continue until we actually organize to build real leverage and address the actual root causes of these issues and why neither party identifies them.


  • First, don’t vote for genociders. I think if that isn’t the limit, you don’t have one and might as well admit to being a supporter of genocide.

    Cool headline, but ultimately just another call to have people throw their votes to a third-party candidate in protest

    Those who organize to vote third party do a better job at building leverage for their interests than sheepdogs that try to convince people to Vite Blue No Matter Who. Which one is throwing a vote away? You don’t even register on Dems’ radar as anything other than a “likely Dem voter” to maybe send a volunteer out to remind you to vote.

    …which could just lead to Trump’s victory, which the article itself acknowledges would be the worst possible outcome.

    The article does not say that. It is very clear on its line that neither party is the one to fight for black people. I have to assume you simply didn’t read it.

    The time to fight the Democratic leadership is unfortunately past

    The time to fight oppressive genociders never passes. Please stop telling other people to give up their fight for justice. I’m getting white moderate vibes from your comment.

    PS Harris has never won a single state in a Democratic primary. What in earth do you think was the right time and right method of opposition and building if leverage? The party just dictated all of this at you and now you carry water for it.

    and the only way forward to being able to win going forward is to vote for Harris.

    To win what? The thesis of this article is that black people don’t win regardless of which party has the presidency. Who are you talking to and do they understand what you mean by “win”?

    Voting for Trump (or casting a third-party candidate, essentially the same thing) is guaranteed to make things much worse.

    Voting for a third party is not the same as voting for Trump. Get that nonsense out if here.





  • You need oxidants to live. Issues stemming from oxidants are about levels of free radicals getting too high in the wrong places for too long.

    Getting good sleep, eating a balanced diet, reducing stress, and getting enough exercise are the best ways to reduce the chances of such a scenario. Realistically, these things are also just a way to maximize wellness and health overall and it is probably not very useful for most people to think of this in terms of oxidation.




  • When we and other known organisms take energy from food we are actually taking molecules with higher-energy electrons, converting them into the high-energy molecules our cellular processes can use to do make cell things happen, and producing very similar molecules with lower-energy electrons. Rather than infinitely accumulating these molecules, our cells dump low-energy electrons onto another molecule that is amenable and thereby convert into a molecule ready to accept high-energy molecules from food (with a bunch of steps in between).

    For us, as aerobes, the electron acceptor at the end of respiration is oxygen.

    Oxygen as an electron receptor is newer than several others. Anaerobes came first. It was only after photosynthesis had produced a ton of atmospheric oxygen that it became a viable option, really. But it O2 is a comparatively good electron acceptor because the process in which it accepts those electrons allows cells to grab quite a bit of energy from that last step. It is fairly “electron needy” compared to earlier electron acceptors.

    So, basically, aerobes get more energy per food unit (sugar molecule) than the vast majority of other creatures. You need it to live because it is an essential part of how your cells get food, namely, how it can recycle molecules at the last step of the respiration cycle.


  • Barx [none/use name]@hexbear.nettoScience Memes@mander.xyzOxygen
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    The dietary antioxidant fad is mostly BS. They’re supposedly meant to counteract oxidative stress and specifically free radicals. Both of those things are part of a healthy life and you would die without them. So any real impact is not so simple as “just counteract those bad things”. Dietary antioxidants don’t always lead to higher intracellular antioxidant levels, either.

    Some dietary antioxidants so lead to higher intracellular levels and may help buffer oxidative stress (like from exercise) but there isn’t much evidence that it doesn’t just boil down to “eating your vegetables is good for you”.




  • As a start, follow the 3-2-1 rule:

    • At least 3 copies of the data.

    • On at least 2 different devices / media.

    • At least 1 offsite backup.

    I would add one more thing: invest in a process for verifying that your backups are working. Like a test system that is occasionally restored to from backups.

    Let’s say what you care about most is photos. You will want to store them locally on a computer somewhere (one copy) and offsite somewhere (second copy). So all you need to do is figure out one more local or offsite location for your third copy. Offsite is probably best but is more expensive. I would encrypt the data and then store on the cloud for my main offsite backup. This way your data is private so it doesn’t matter that it is stored in someone else’s server.

    I am personally a fan of Borg backup because you can do incremental backups with a retention policy (like Macs’ Time Machine), the archive is deduped, and the archive can be encrypted.

    Consider this option:

    1. Your data raw on a server/computer in your home.

    2. An encrypted, deduped archive on that sane computer.

    3. That archive regularly copied to a second device (ideally another medium) and synchronized to a cloud file storage system.

    4. A backup restoration test process that takes the backups and shows that they restores important files, the right number, size, etc.

    If disaster strikes and all your local copies are toast, this strategy ensures you don’t lose important data. Regular restore testing ensures the remote copy is valid. If you have two cloyd copies, you are protected against one of the providers screwing up and removing data without you knowing and fixing it.