They renamed mens quintembris and mens sextembris to July and August. Originally, The Roman year started on the spring equinox at 1 March, and September–December were indeed the 7^th—10th month of their year. Spring equinox shifted over the centuries due to an incorrectly calculated length of the year. I forgot why they shifted New Year to 1 January and who did this.

Depends on a lot of circumstances – weight, kidney and heart function, temperature, activity. The people I saw developing hyponatriema drank more than 4–5 l tap water. Desalinated water will cause problems sooner.

People would make their own beverages (mostly beer and wine, as alcohol was the only preservant working) and use barrels to store them and mugs to drink them. After the development of pasteurization they would pasteurize juice and keep it in glass bottles. And they would share with neighbours, family and friends.

Of course there were breweries and wineries, too, they would sell their stuff mostly in barrels to pubs, and people would buy their beer and wine at the pub if they couldn’t make their own. In our area it was a common task for children to get a mug of beer for dad from the pub until the 50s, I think.

Pre-fabricated, non-alcoholic, bottled beverages are a modern luxury item we all got used to as normal.

There are no cardboard container for liquids — cardboard soaks and dissolves in water. What you are likely refering to is tetrapak, a compound material made of plastic, aluminium and cardboard. I think I’ve seen packages using only plastic coated cardboard without aluminium as well. You can test it yourself: just rip it apart and you can examine the layers of the compound material.

I don’t know about the impact of production — paper production still destroys woods, needs lots of water and energy, aluminium needs tons of energy. Probably better than glass and worse than PET?

Transportationwise they are as good as PET, probably better.

Regarding recycling they are a nightmare, it’s almost impossible, because you have to separate the three layers which are designed to stick together. Tetrapak claims they are recycling them, but this technique is fairly new and I’ve got no idea how well it works and how sustainable it is.

There have been extensive studies on that topic, that showed that PET-bottles are more sustainable and environment friendly than glass bottles and have less impact on the environmdnt. Glass bottles use a lot more energy to produce and transport than PET bottles, and the oil you save by using PET instead of glass is more than enough to produce the PET you need. You also save sand, potash, limestone, soda and a ton of CO2.

If renewables would become the prime source of energy for glass production and transportation, this conclusion might change, and if the effects of microplastics and ocean pollution are considered it might change as well.

Regarding sources, there is an abundance of them in German and quite a few in English. I’ll leave this one as an example.

Du you have any sources on the claim that recycling is a scam?

So — though using collected plastic as fuel feels sort of cheating — the percentage of plastic that is put to any use after use is even higher.

Do they still count energetic recycling (aka burning in a power plant) as recycling?

You cannot use cardboard for liquids. There are containers that have a cardboard exterior – just tear them, and you’ll find out they are made out of a sandwich material with an interior layer of plastic, meddle layer of aluminium and exterior cardboard. almist unrecyclable.

No, it wasn’t. Or to be exact, we don’t know, but it’s highly unlikely. In 2009, the bone growth pattern of Myotragus was thought to occur only in cold blooded animals, but in 2012 they found it is widespread in extant mammals as well.

My browser eats timestamps, til. And yes, that is impressive.

Thanks, I’ll listen into it.

This is far worse than being not a reliable source of info. Ms Chen had all the info she needed, and Claude falsified it.

Hm. I wasn’t able to listen to all 9:53:57, but in the samples I watched I heard a voice resembling the classical computer voice of Science Fiction movies of the 70s. Better than most YouTube AI generated audio content, but good enough to narrate audio books? Well, we’ll accustom to anything, I guess.

To rephrase my question: where can I listen to an example of good AI spoken content?

People are more complicated than cars, and surgeons are no magicians. I think your idea of the reason of your mother’s surgeon for refusal might be a bit off:

1. Without adequate pre- and post-op physiotherapy, a joint will likely be worse after surgery.

2. If simple physiotherapy is already too painful, cutting into this overexcited tissue risks inducing a complex regional pain syndrome.

3. If someone suffers from both depression and from too much pain to do physiotherapy, they need a multimodal pain therapy to prepare for surgery.

So, based on the bit of info you provided, refusing surgery was very likely the right thing to do to avoid worsening your mother’s situation. What I di hate is when doctors don’t explain themselves and just say “I can’t help you”, but do not point patients to someone who can.

So cloudfare found out that your true self is a bot — time to optimize some of the anthropomimical code.

Reading is not an alternative to listening. Both have different use cases. You cannot read while driving, to name just one.

Using different voices to read different parts of a book turns an audiobook into a bad audio play, and arguably, a bad audio play is worse than a mediocre audio book.

What audible misses is, that, while reading is a technique that can be automated, narrating is an art. They can use AI to read books, they cannot use AI to narrate books.

Your example of AI use is a good example of this: AI can read your content. AI can enhance your capabilities. But only you can narrate it.

Did you ever heard a single AI-narrated content that did not make you run away screaming?