That factoid makes celsius relevant for about 4 out of the 12 months, and humans lack the capacity to distinguish between 60-100 on the Celsius scale. Anything at those temperatures just feels like blisters.

Yep!

Personally, I’m deprecating “its”.

The “its/it’s” distinction requires violation of the apostrophe-s rule for possessive forms. This exception to that rule is entirely arbitrary. The meaning is never ambiguous in context; the distinction exists solely to enable pedantry and confuse spell checkers.

So, English will be better off by retiring “its”, relegating it to the trash heap along with “chuse”.

“It’s” is now a homonym. Both the contraction rules and the possessive rules for apostrophe-s construction are maintained, and the only people who will cry about it are English teachers and other worthless pedants.

I have spoken.

If “poisonous” are parallelograms and “venomous” are trapezoids, “toxic” would be quadrilaterals in general. (Can’t use square/rectangle analogy, because squares are a type of rectangle, and venom/poison is not a type of poison/venom.)

Aside from that, there aren’t too many rules on “toxic”.

Poison and venom will both cause serious acute injury with the possibility of immediate death. Both can be considered “toxic”.

Just to be confusing, “poison” and “poisoning” can have substantially different connotations. For example, the heavy metal “lead” would not normally* be considered a “poison”. Lead would generally be considered “toxic”.

But, repeated exposure to lead to the point that it causes physical symptoms is referred to as “lead poisoning”.

Same thing with mercury: it would be considered “toxic”; it wouldn’t normally* be considered a poison. But repeated exposure to mercury would be considered “mercury poisoning”.

(* If a third party were to deliberately introduce lead or mercury into the body of an individual, the substance would then be considered a “poison”.)

If you kill a snake and decide to chew on the venom glands, would they be considered poisonous or venomous?

Every measurement system has had its formal definition changed several times. The kilogram, for example, was once formally defined as the mass of a specific block of metal in France, which was later determined to be losing mass, and thus made a pretty terrible standard. Now, the kilogram is formally defined in terms of the meter and the Planck Constant.

Celsius was once defined by the freezing and boiling points of water, but those aren’t actually constant: Fahrenheit’s brine mixture is actually significantly more consistent. Kelvin’s degree spacing comes from that definition of Celsius, but it it was eventually redefined to be more precise by using the triple point of water: pure water at a specific pressure and temperature where it can simultaneously exist as solid, liquid, and gas. Significantly more accurate, but not enough: Kelvin was redefined in 2019 in terms of joules, which are in turn defined by kg, m, s, which are ultimately defined in terms of the Planck constant.

Celsius is now formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit is also formally defined in terms of Kelvin. Fahrenheit’s brine story is just a piece of trivia.

100 is the imprecise average body temperature of the developer

That’s a myth. It’s no more true than the myth that it was the body temperature of horses, or that the scale was designed to reflect how humans experience the weather. (It happens to reflect how humans experience the weather, but this was an incidental characteristic and not the purpose for which the scale was designed.)

The Fahrenheit scale starts to make sense when you realize he was a geometrist. It turns out that a base-10 system of angular measurement objectively sucks ass, so the developer wasn’t particularly interested geometrically irrelevant numbers like “100”, but in geometrically interesting numbers like “180”. He put 180 degrees between the freezing and boiling points of water. (212F - 32F = 180F)

After settling on the “width” of his degree, he measured down to a repeatable origin point, which happened to be 32 of his degrees below the freezing point of water. He wanted a dial thermometer to point straight down in ice water, straight up in boiling water, and to use the same angular degrees as a protractor.

The calibration point he chose wasn’t the “freezing point” of the “random brine mixture”. The brine was water, ice, and ammonium chloride, which together form a frigorific mixture due to the phase change of the water. As the mixture is cooled, it resists getting colder than 0F due to the phase change of the water to ice. As it is warmed, it resists getting warmer than 0F due to the phase change of ice to water. (Obviously, it can’t maintain this relationship indefinitely. But so long as there is ice and liquid brine, the brine will maintain this temperature.) This makes it repeatable, in labs around the world.

And it wasn’t a “random” brine mixture: it was the coldest and most stable frigorific mixture known to the scientific community.

This criticism of Fahrenheit is borne of simple ignorance: people don’t understand how or why it was developed, and assume he was an idiot. He wasn’t. He had very good reasons for his choices.

It’s just so arbitrary

All of them are. The decision to use water at all is completely arbitrary. Even Kelvin and Rankine are completely arbitrary: the “width” of the degrees is not defined by a physical factor, but relative to an entirely arbitrary concept.

I mean, I have clothes. Long underwear? Layers? Coats, gloves, hats, scarves?

They say you can always put on more clothes if you’re cold, but that’s not really true. Insulation adds bulk, and bulk reduces mobility. Around 0F is where I start to have real trouble wearing enough clothing to stay warm while still being able to perform the activity that has me outside in that weather. Somewhere around 0F, clothing doesn’t really cut it, and I need shelter or additional heat.

Geometric construction plays a role in there as well: the 180 degrees between the boiling point and the freezing point of water was not accidental.

Every time a heat wave brings 100F, the news starts reporting about old people dying. Every time the temperatures reach zero, same thing.

Personally, I can handle the cold much easier than the heat. I get stupid-brain working more than 30 minutes at 95F. Another 15 minutes and I can’t catch my breath, lose fine motor control, and start feeling faint. Drenching myself in water - the colder the better - every 20 minutes or so is the only way I’ve found to be productive above 100F. I feel like 100F is actively trying to kill me.

0F is where it starts getting difficult for me to stay warm without an additional heat source.

Exactly. Fahrenheit is just metric weather.

We do cooking temps in Fahrenheit, weather in Celsius.

Fahrenheit: let’s use “really cold weather” as zero and “really hot weather” as 100.

Celsius: let’s use “freezing water” as zero, and “boiling water” as 100.

Canucks:

What are you even on about? One person could conceivably add CSAM to a torrent that you eventually download, and you could find yourself subject to a criminal investigation.

I’ve gone my entire adult life downloading copyrighted material without using a VPN

“I’ve been fucking multiple partners weekly my entire adult life. without protection, and I haven’t gotten AIDS yet.” <— That’s you. That’s what you sound like.

You are giving your ISP every thing that a rightsholder needs to harass you, with your understanding that laws and corporate policies currently protect you from that harassment. But you ignore that those policies can be changed, and those changes can apply to data you’ve previously given to your ISP. When rightsholders start arguing “think of the children” and pointing at such torrents, that’s the kind of thing that gets laws and policies changed.

Why give them the information in the first place? Why not keep that information away from your ISP? Why trust them to do the right thing when you can easily deny them the ability to do wrong?

That level of paranoia is a waste of energy.

I know I am paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?

Identifying and evaluating vulnerabilities is a critical component of any security plan. In a good one, any vulnerabilities will be well outside the scope of feasibility.

Why would some Hollywood studio plant CSAM in a torrent?

To cast FUD on piracy in general. To inextricably link “pirate” with “pedophile” in the mind of the general public. To convince the general public to treat copyright infringement as criminal rather than a civil matter.

That would implicate them as well.

They hire or extort someone to initially seed from some third world ISPs, and the swarm takes over from there. It never gets traced back to them.

It would cost them far more in legal fees to come after me than to just leave it alone.

You aren’t the objective, just the means. The purpose is to make piracy a truly objectionable practice in the eyes of the public.

None of this is a likely threat, but is any of it completely outside the realm of feasibility?

You don’t have any justification to be that condescending. Your security practices are reliant on the law, and the law is not a factor under your direct control. It has changed without your input before, and it will change without your input in the future. Meanwhile, your ISP is building a record of your non-compliance that it can provide to rightsholders just as soon as it likes.

Good security practice minimizes reliance on factors outside your control. You can’t control whether your ISP has your personally identifiable information, but you can deny them knowledge of your data transfers. You can’t control whether a VPN has knowledge of your data transfers, but you can deny them knowledge of your PII.

Also it definitely would cost them if they told me “we have not responded to this notice from the rightsholder” and then turned around and did exactly that. That would be a flat out lie to their client.

As of the time of their letter, they had not responded to that notice. They could respond tomorrow without ever having lied to you. You would not have grounds to sue.

Just out of curiosity, will your Canadian ISP and your (current) Canadian laws protect you when a rightsholder portrays you as a pedophile instead of a pirate? If they anonymously publish a torrent containing their movie and some hidden CSAM, are you fucked?

What incentive do they have to actually follow through on that claim?

I pay my ISP $600/yr. If a third party with a bug up their ass creates $601 worth of trouble for my ISP, why wouldn’t they throw me under the bus?

No ISP is deserving of the kind of trust you describe. It costs them nothing to put those words in a letter.

I don’t particularly trust a VPN provider either, for much the same reason. But, the VPN provider wants to know as little about me as possible, while the ISP needs to know everything.

On the public wifi, the operator of that wifi can see any data you pass through their network. They can likely see what sites you visit, but probably can’t see what data you send to and from those sites, due to encryption. Unless they have an account with you, or you provide your information in clearext, they can link your data to your devices, but not to you directly, at least not from your use of the AP. They can potentially link your data to your image on their cameras, and thus your identity.

Your ISP has the same access to your data, but they also have a payment account linked to you, and they regularly cooperate with rights holders and law enforcement.

A VPN can do the same thing as an ISP: they know what sites you visit, but probably don’t know what data you are sending and receiving, and they can link it to your payment account. However, they generally do not cooperate with rights holders, and may or may not cooperate with law enforcement in their jurisdiction. While you are using a VPN, your ISP knows you are using them, but doesn’t know what you are sending back and forth, due to encryption.

If you want to remain as anonymous as possible, use a burner device with no accounts on public wifi.

If you want to avoid harassment by rights holders while you engage in piracy, a VPN is sufficient.

There is an app on f-droid called “shelter” that gives you access to Android Work Profiles. This is a sandboxed area of your phone that makes it function like a second phone. You can install apps that are only accessible from within that sandbox. You can install a second, sandboxed copy of an app. You can shut down all your sandboxed apps simultaneously.

I have a bunch of bullshit, garbage apps I very rarely use installed in my sandboxed “work” profile (Facebook, restaurant apps, and some other assorted trash apps) so they won’t harass me at random.

To me It looks like a nightly routine of positive self-talk while visualizing myself getting up the next morning to carry out my planned agenda

All that visualization would have me excited to get started. I’d be up all night thinking about the plan, then be too exhausted to even get out of bed when it’s finally time to actually get started.