Oats are about 15% calories from protein, 85% from carbs.
High protein foods would be:
egg white (90% calories from protein), chicken breast (80%), lean fish such as cod (90%)
medium protein foods would be:
fatty beef (e.g. ribeye) 50% calories from protein, cottage cheese (60%), fatty fish like salmon (55% calories from protein), whole eggs (fatty yolk plus white, 36% calories from protein), soybeans (36-40%)
low protein foods would be:
lentils (30%), 2% milk (26% calories from protein), lima beans (22% protein), parmesan cheese (30%), summer squash/zuccini (24% protein), most mushrooms (25-30%).
very-low protein foods would be:
rice (9%), onions (9%), winter squash (10%), red bell peppers (12-13%), sweet corn (12%)
Here, by very low, I mean if you try to get your protein from these sources, you will end up obese unless you expend extreme amounts of energy exercising or maintain serious protein deficiencies (muscle loss). You can get decent amount of protein if you are downing lentils, whole milk, parmesan, soybeans, salmon, etc, e.g. you don't need to eat high protein foods, but this is about the bottom level to get reasonable protein while maintaining reasonable weight unless you are a day laborer or expending massive calories.
At only 15% calories from protein (the rest being carbs), oats would be not much better than corn in terms of protein content per calorie consumed. Nothing wrong with eating some corn on the cob, but that's not gonna be a major source of protein for anyone unless you are willing to consume huge amounts of carbs.
I assume they mean non animal sources of protein. Of course it'll be hard for plant based foods to compete. Out of non animal sources, oatmeal is pretty good, especially as a cheap staple food no less
The human body does not grade on a curve. There is as much protein in oatmeal per calorie as there is in red bell peppers and obviously people don't cite red bell peppers as a high protein food, this is true even if for some reason they really prefer to eat red bell peppers.
If you want something from non-animal sources, go for mushrooms and soybeans, which have twice as much protein per calorie as oats. Mushrooms are an under-rated source of protein, as is cottage cheese.
Worse. Some people even deleet all of there online banking, except, for an account that can recieve funds from online sources, and then deal with everything in person at the bank.
Which then frees up devices to skip the whole closed source misery go round.
I would never use a bank that required a smartphone in order to access your money or do normal banking activities like transfers and payments. Fortunately here in the USA there are thousands of little mom n pop banks and credit unions, so I think we are safe from that madness at least until I’m dead and buried.
There were other prediction markets like Intrade which was founded in 1999. I had coworkers who made a significant amount of money doing prediction market arbitrage for the 2012 election.
Intrade confuses me. It was illegal to use Intrade as a US citizen; in fact, some people I personally know who were into that scene had to maintain foreign bank accounts.
What has changed, exactly, to make Polymarket legal where Intrade was not?
Giving it to you straight: GOP SCOTUS court packing via denying Obama’s nomination led to 6-3 supermajority, and it ruled gambling legislation was a states rights issue. Sports gambling startups ate sports right up, then, innovators like YC funded companies that said “that, but for everything” and collided with a shameless pay-to-play administration, not the general “politicians take donations from companies” kind, the “name don jr as your strategic advisor” kind. (Kalshi) Now the argument that would have appeared batshit insane a decade ago, that there’s no federal way to prevent this) is de facto law of the land.
> and it ruled gambling legislation was a states rights issue.
What did that change? Gambling legislation was a states' issue before. You might have noticed that different states had wildly different gambling regimes.
(...and all federal legislation is a states' rights issue?)
> Now the argument that would have appeared batshit insane a decade ago, that there’s no federal way to prevent this[,] is [the] de facto law of the land.
You're talking about a law that was invalidated eight years ago, and passed 24 years before that. Which position would have looked insane more of the time?
Fair point that PASPA was the exception, not the rule, and that the anti-commandeering / "states rights" argument isn't some novel theory. It does happen to be deployed often in cases where businesses don't want to be regulated. (and, the elephant in the room, more famously....never mind, let's not go there)
I overstated the court-packing angle, Murphy was 7-2, not a partisan split.
But my actual point is narrower than the constitutional question: in practice, sports betting was confined to Nevada and reservations for decades. Once that dam broke, the path from legal sports betting to VC-funded "that but for everything" prediction markets to the current situation happened really fast, and there's no regulatory apparatus keeping up with it. Whether the dam should have broken is a separate question from whether anyone's minding the flood.
> What has changed, exactly, to make Polymarket legal where Intrade was not?
Polymarket opened a subbranch to handle US customers subject to US law. It's separate from Polymarket proper, which remains illegal for US citizens to use.
If you’ve ever felt like you didn’t belong, like your contributions were judged on something other than quality, like you were expected to be someone you’re not—I want you to know:
You are not alone.
Your differences matter. Your perspective matters. Your voice matters, even when—and especially when—it doesn’t sound like everyone else’s.
> Writing some Irish language poems on your lunchbreaks is cheap. Doing public readings as an unknown poet is not.
How is doing public reading of poetry not cheap?
I have friends who do standup comedy and they just show up at open mic nights and it doesn’t cost them anything. One is good enough that now the venues are paying him a little bit.
AI can help increase productivity, that is get more outputs (goods/services) for the same inputs.
Two hundred years ago, shirts had to be hand-spun, hand-woven, and hand-sewn, so ordinary people could only own one or two. Now because of automation and factories they are so cheap that poor people have many.
Previously 97% of the workforce was engaged in agriculture, and even in the 20th century, famines killed millions. Now with increased productivity we create so much food that obesity is the defining health crisis of our time.
All classes have been able afford better clothing and more food, not just those owning the means of production.
> instead of going further down the same road we're already on
Even in the last 25 years, we've seen large increases in life expectancy, child mortality fell by more than 50%, 1 billion people left extreme poverty, access to knowledge and education expanded, and more.
reply