Eddie

@ChefGruel @FischerKing64 I was a student once. I’ll stick with the American way.

America’s school lunch process - mass production in a factory (pre-cooked, portioned, frozen, etc). Then it’s shipped nationwide and stored at schools. To serve it’s reheated in ovens or steamers with a tray line assembly to meet USDA specs. In Japan they have the students cook and serve their food it’s actually written into their curriculum. Guess who is healthier?

@OwenGregorian Climate change? Apparently India hasn’t received the memo.

Think planting trees will save the planet from global warming? Science says it’s not that simple | The Times Of India Planting trees is often described as a simple way to deal with climate change. The idea is easy to understand. Trees take in carbon dioxide and store it. Forests also support wildlife and help regulate water systems. Because of this, many governments and companies have promised to plant large numbers of trees. The expectation is that this will offset emissions. EarthDay.org research shows the situation is not that straightforward. Tree planting helps, but only within limits. The overall impact depends on scale, location, and long-term survival. Scientists generally agree that reforestation cannot replace the need to cut emissions from fossil fuels. Why planting trees is not enough to fight climate change The trees use this carbon dioxide and the oxygen from photosynthesis. The carbon dioxide is stored in the trees. The amount of carbon stored is reduced. The process is well understood. However, there is a limit to this process. The first limit is land. There is not enough land that can be converted into forests without affecting other food sources. Even if all the land is converted into forests, there is still not enough to cover the amount of carbon being released into the atmosphere from energy production and use. The planting of trees can be a valuable tool in the fight to save the environment. However, there are more forests being planted while others continue to be destroyed. The more forests that are destroyed, the less effective tree planting becomes. When forests are destroyed, the carbon stored is released back into the environment. The forests continue to be destroyed, which is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. The planting of trees can be considered a replacement for what was destroyed. The preservation of forests is considered a more effective tool. The older forests store more carbon. Planting trees in the right places matters more The effectiveness of tree planting also depends on the region. The best results in terms of carbon uptake are generally found in tropical regions. In these areas, trees grow faster and are more effective in absorbing carbon. They also help to increase the level of moisture in the air, which leads to a cooling effect. However, tree planting may not be so effective in colder climates. This is because the ground tends to be covered with snow. Snow reflects the sun’s rays. When trees are planted on this ground, they absorb more heat. This phenomenon is known as the albedo effect. Thus, tree planting in a particular region may be more effective than planting trees all over. Broader climate impacts and challenges of tree planting Forests do not only store carbon. They also affect rainfall, temperature, and air circulation. Large-scale changes in forest cover can alter regional climate patterns. Some studies indicate that these effects can extend beyond the immediate area. Changes in one region may influence conditions elsewhere. Tree planting projects do not always succeed. These involve planting a single species over large areas. Such systems are more vulnerable to disease and environmental stress. In some regions, climate conditions have increased fire risk. Poorly managed forests can contribute to fuel buildup. When fires occur, stored carbon is released, reducing the intended benefit. Why tree planting cannot replace cutting carbon emissions The reduction of emissions from fossil fuels remains the most significant step to combat climate change. Energy production, transportation, and industries continue to emit a lot of carbon dioxide. Tree planting can be an added step to these measures, but cannot replace them. Other measures include protecting existing trees and better land management. Tree planting can be a helpful step in dealing with climate change. This is because tree planting can help in carbon storage and stability. However, tree planting can only be helpful when done in conjunction with other measures. The current evidence indicates that dealing with climate change involves a number of measures. Reforestation is one of these measures, but it should be done in conjunction with a reduction in greenhouse emissions. timesofindia.indiatimes.com/science/think-…

@OwenGregorian I’m not convinced AI can lie quite as well as politicians, so …

AI-generated ads are trickling into political campaigns, sparking big worries | Jennifer Igbonoba, NBC News At least 15 campaign ads featuring AI-generated content have run since November, stoking concerns that the now-ubiquitous technology could cause confusion or even mislead voters ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. In state, local and federal elections across the country, AI has been everywhere from school board campaigns to governor’s races, used to enhance speech, turn politicians into cartoons or, in one notable case in Massachusetts, mimic a rival politician’s voice. In the state’s gubernatorial race, the campaign of Republican primary candidate Brian Shortsleeve created an AI-generated radio ad that sounds like Democratic Gov. Maura Healey, using Healey’s “voice” to say things she never actually said, including about the state’s economy. The clip does not contain an explicit AI disclaimer, and instead the caption says it’s what her radio ads would sound like “if she was honest.” Shortsleeve’s campaign has also released AI-generated videos depicting Healey as the Grinch and another of her hissing with red eyes, neither of which contained explicit AI disclaimers. Patrick Nelson, Shortsleeve’s communications director, said the campaign uses AI to educate voters in a “creative, humorous, and fun” way, adding that its policy is to disclose AI use if it depicts a person in a way that is “not obvious to a reasonable viewer.” Healey’s campaign directed NBC News to a statement from the Massachusetts Democratic Party in February. “He should stop lying to voters and tell them the truth — he will be a rubber stamp on President Trump’s harmful agenda,” said MassDems Chair Steve Kerrigan. More recently, the National Republican Senatorial Committee last week released an AI-generated video of James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Texas, reading real tweets on race and transgender rights. Talarico spokesperson JT Ennis said in response to the ad that the Republican primary candidates are the ones who are “scared” of the Democrat, according to CNN. Talarico’s campaign declined NBC News’ request for comment. At the local level, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s recent mayoral campaign in New York City used AI in a few ads, including one depicting criminals in support of now-Mayor Zohran Mamdani. And in Texas, Rep. Jasmine Crockett drew attention and plenty of scrutiny for her Senate campaign’s use of AI, while her likeness was also used in Republican AI ads. The ads demonstrate that AI is not just coming for political campaigns — it’s already here. Now, it’s a question of where the lines are both legally and ethically. “Anytime generative AI is used to create messaging or imagery that is misleading, I hope we can all agree that’s a negative thing,” said Mark Jablonowski, the CEO of DSPolitical, a progressive advertising firm. “When you’re trying to be deceitful or have something that never existed, that’s a big issue.” AI video generators have grown by leaps and bounds in recent years, starting off with crude and at times bizarre clips to now being capable of ultrarealistic media that requires particularly close inspection to determine its synthetic origins. Producing political ads is not cheap. The cost can range anywhere from around $1,000 to orders of magnitude more, depending on factors such as production costs, casting, postproduction costs and distribution, according to Media Culture, a media buying and marketing company. For smaller campaigns with less resources — and larger ones too — AI-generated imagery can be a cost saver. “It’s not the overall size of the campaign itself. It’s, are they hiring an ad agency that is running on thin margins and needs to do this, or needs to turn it around in a certain amount of time, very quickly?” said Todd Belt, a professor at George Washington University and director of its political management program. But with efficiency comes the risk of deceiving voters. Jablonowski said the bigger concern of AI-generated imagery in political communications is when individuals who create those products don’t follow ethical guidelines. AI usage in political ads is largely regulated at the state level. Twenty-six states have laws regulating the use of political deepfakes — which use AI to create deceptively realistic video or audio — and either require their disclosure or prohibit their use within a certain time frame before an election, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some state legislatures, including in Maine and Vermont, have introduced bills to require disclosures on AI-generated imagery in political advertising. At the federal level, AI regulation has remained in limbo. In 2023, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Rep. Yvette Clark, D-N.Y., introduced the REAL Political Advertisements Act, which would require AI disclosures on political ads. Neither bill made it to a vote in their respective chamber. While Jablonowski believes AI-generated ads will only ramp up as the midterms approach, he believes that politicians will rise above them. “The good news is, I think most campaigns on both sides of the aisle probably want to do the right thing,” Jablonowski said. “There, of course, are going to be examples that you can point to where people are going about it the wrong way.” nbcnews.com/politics/2028-…

@ThxTom90228 @EWErickson You’re such an imbecile.

@EWErickson No, The reporter EXPERT from Sky News (UK) reported today that Trump had backed down, the Iranians scared him with their threats to hit desalinization plants, and cowardly Trump is losing the war and the mighty Iranians have triumphed once again.

I want to point out something objectively true. Right now, each of you is as much an expert on what the Iranian regime is thinking as every talking head on television who pronounces for the Iranian regime. The leadership is dead. The gay ayatollah is, at best, in a coma. The President of Iran is a figurehead, not talking to anyone else in leadership. The head of the Air Force is dead. The head of the Army is dead. The head of the Navy is dead. The head of the secret police is dead. The head of the Basij militia is dead. The Iranian IRGC spokesman is dead. In some cases, we are on the replacements of the replacements of the dead. We’re on the C team now across the board — people without ties to the television analysts who have long pontificated on what the Iranian leadership is thinking. So much of what you are hearing about what the leadership might do or is thinking is based on pro-Iran analysts who are not talking to the present leadership, but only know the thinking of the dead leadership. In other words, you know as much as them. ewerickson.substack.com/p/fe5e60dd-44b…

@KNEECAPCEOL Ridiculous person.

Even in Havana, with the power cutting out shorty after our gig, the message of solidarity to Palestine remains the same ❤️

@j_fishback What a tool. Try getting a life.

Got kicked out of Mar-a-Lago for criticizing the Iran War so I went to Taco Bell instead. Better food, even better people.

@Lee_Vertisce @ClownWorld You’re an idiot.

@ClownWorld He actually is the bad guy. If people have been using it and it's documented as such, then it's a public right of way and he doesn't have the right to block it off even if he owns the property.

People had been using this as a shortcut to a waterfall for years, then someone actually buys the property and suddenly he’s the bad guy for putting up a gate. It’s private land. Just because something was “always open” doesn’t mean it belongs to everyone. Now they’re showing up pissed, flipping him off on camera like he owes them access. Here’s a compilation of all the people mad about it

@RepJasonCrow You’re a terrible liar.

One party owns this shutdown. Democrats keep trying to fund TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, and cyber security. Republicans have blocked every single vote.

@OcrazioCornPop I don’t know and neither do you.

🚨 JUST IN: “We will have 50 days of higher prices for 50 years of no Iran nukes.” - Scott Bessent BE HONEST: DO YOU THINK THIS WILL ONLY LAST 50 DAYS?

@JackPosobiec All that and he threw away it all for what?

Joe Kent has Six Bronze Star Medals with five Oak Leaf Clusters across 11 combat deployments as a Green Beret in some of the biggest battles of the GWOT

They voted for this. No sympathy.

@WallStreetApes It sucks, but I’m not being crushed.

Americans are being crushed by rapidly rising electric bills Breakdown of American’s bills October 2024: $23.83 gas $195.45 electric $300.00 water = $519.58 January 2025: $161 gas $143.91 electric $200 water = $504.91 October 2025 $59.71 gas $201.93 electric $84.24 water = $345.88 January 2026 $357.66 gas $262.05 electric $71.93 water = $691.64 February 2026 $379.41 gas $284.23 electric $78.98 water = $742.82 “Why am I paying a thousand dollars a month in utilities? What the f*ck are we doing?” If we all don’t get loud about this energy bills will keep climbing and plunge Americans into a worse standard of living. This can’t be normalized

@StealthMedical1 @dbongino @POTUS @LauraLoomer I hate this. Please stop.

I don’t know who any of these men are but if they said what I think they said about @POTUS and having a fever dream about his “potential assassination” and @dbongino @LauraLoomer are all over their retarded mugs then I am going to drag them as well.

@charlescwcooke STFU, you infant.

The president should not do this. There are no exceptions to that rule.

@Rep_Stansbury No reason to condemn Trump. He’s right on point and right. You’re living a childish delusion.

This man is off his rocker.

@TVietor08 You’re so confused.

Netanyahu talks to the rest of the world like they're stupid. Everyone knows that he and Trump started this war. No one believes that he gives a shit about civilian casualties in Iran, Gaza or anywhere else. This propaganda just doesn't work any more, if it ever did.

@RepMikeLevin Liar.

If you changed your name when you got married, take notice.    Under the SAVE Act, your driver’s license wouldn’t be enough to vote. You’d need a birth certificate that matches your current legal name. Most women who changed their name at marriage don’t have that. And getting it costs money you shouldn’t have to spend just to cast a ballot.    Republicans aren’t targeting noncitizens. They’re targeting you.

@SaltyGoat17 @AmericaPapaBear Ban muslims and it’ll go away.

Should the Muslim “call to prayer” be banned in the US?

@overton_news Why indeed?

Senator Fetterman asks the one question Democrats don’t want answered about the DHS shutdown: “Why would you want to make America more unsecured in the middle of these kinds [Islamist] attacks?” FETTERMAN: “I have been consistently the only Democrat to vote against this shutdown.” “It’s wrong.” “You witnessed what happened in Michigan, that individual that drove into the synagogue.” “He showed up to kill 150 toddlers, so why would you want to make America more unsecured in the middle of these kinds of attacks?”