Maybe reread the conversation, because you seem to be assuming a tone on my part that isn’t there.

maybe for simple queries

Yeah. I’m referring to simple queries. That’s the vast majority of my queries.

That’s impossible, because most of my searches are literally as fast as me typing the query, and then I get the answer.

That’s why I’m asking what you guys are searching for, because this has been a dramatic improvement for me.

What are you guys searching for? I find that Google’s AI search results are the only improvement that Google search has made in at least 20 years. Because other than that it’s been a slow and steady decline, even when I take the time to make a really specific query.

I also find this is the one circumstance where AI has actually made something better, possibly because Google search had just gotten that bad.

There’s also Houston, the largest city in the state. Houston is alright, mostly.

I read about a study years ago that said yes, the benefit keeps going up the more caffeine you consume. Not sure I could find it again though.

Peanut butter, jelly, bread.

But if I’m doing it healthy, then add eggs, spinach, blueberries, yogurt.

👍

I think we just need to revise the laws to say that a cop’s testimony doesn’t have any more weight than anyone else’s testimony unless it’s backed up by their bodycam.

Taking cops at their word made sense when we didn’t have this technology. It doesn’t make sense anymore.

When Cheerios says it’s heart healthy, it’s because it has some kind of fiber that helps lower cholesterol. That’s according to scientific studies and the pre-Trump FDA.

Almost all of the foods marketed towards infants and toddlers are UPF.

Except it’s actually not a problem, because UPF does not mean unhealthy.

As it happens the product you’re seeing babies eat isn’t generally Cheerios, it’s something made of rice that dissolves faster to prevent choking.

Yeah, no, it’s definitely Cheerios.

I’ve got three kids. We gave them actual Cheerios. Every parent I know used actual Cheerios. Their daycare has Cheerios on hand for when a kid needs an extra snack. They’re healthy, easy to chew, and have a hole in the middle. They are not a choking hazard.

There are other cereal products specifically made for infants to snack on, but Cheerios are cheaper, more available, and just as good.

For my first two kids we did baby-led weaning (the third one is only five days old), so I know all about teaching children how to chew. And for what it’s worth, my kids eat healthy as fuck. They eat more than a serving of plain vegetables with every dinner, and they enjoy it. Which is why it’s not a big deal if I want to treat them to a donut for breakfast every once in a while.

There are places that don’t have easy access to fresh food. You want people to die of preventable causes? Let’s ban the bread they make their fucking sandwiches with, because other people are shortsighted and privileged enough to think that the only reason anyone doesn’t choose whole-grain, small-batch, artisinal bread is because white bread is “ultra-processed”, so it must be addictive.

By the same token, banning Cheerios would be a great way to make sure a bunch of kids are malnourished.

Apply a little reading comprehension to this extremely scientific article and see how they’re dancing around the fact that “ultra-processed” isn’t synonymous with “unhealthy”. Phrases like “includes soft drinks and packaged snacks such as crisps and biscuits” are clearly manipulative language meant to gloss over the fact that the category includes those things but is not limited to them.

Anyway, here are some better ideas: a four day work week and expanding work-from-home so that people actually have time to make healthy choices. Or how about better funding for school lunches, with an emphasis on variety so that kids can be exposed to more foods, giving them the tools to make healthier choices later in life.

There are so many ways we could try to improve this situation, and blanket bans is by a wide margin the most idiotic.

and try to say there’s nothing wrong with encouraging people to over-consume to the point of morbid obesity just to pump the shareholders’ stocks a few cents higher.

Yeah, and no one is saying that either.

We all agree people need to eat healthier. Targeting “ultra-processed foods” is a stupid way to accomplish that. It would backfire completely, and cause more problems than it would solve.

No, Cheerios. The heart-healthy cereal that people give to infants. That’s an “ultra-processed food”, because the phrase is bullshit.

It was an example of how fucking stupid this idea is.

Please, explain to me how Cheerios are addictive and need to be banned.

I’m sure that’s because of choices that your parents made and nothing to do with living in an area with high population density and easy access to fresh food.

Bread literally is a UPF most of the time. Not necessarily the fresh baked bread that you get from a bakery, but the manufactured bread that’s slightly less healthy but is much cheaper and more accessible to people in remote or impoverished places.

A lot of ultra-processed foods exist because they’re solving specific problems, and you can’t just ban them without providing a better solution to those problems.

How the fuck do you expect to get kids to eat salad when the salad dressing is locked behind a counter with the cigarettes?

The problem is that “ultra-processed foods” is too broad to be meaningful. Also the fact that, you know, some amount of personal choice is essential to a free society.

It seems like it should be unnecessary, like we already have ways of conveying this sentiment, so why have a button with such a narrow function?

But on the other hand, making it normal for people to admit their mistakes online? That would be a huge step forward. And if there’s a button there for it, it would get used.

Then why are they still paying me for it?