Nice work on the write up! It is hard sorting things out when they’re half true. For me, drinking water is especially important to get the fact straight on because of how bad it can go if the system fails. It would be silly to disregard anyone saying water wasn’t up to a safe standard, but separating things I would care about out from the fluoride and chlorine background noise is tricky. Thanks for the deeper dive!
Just generally, you can get a report of your municipal water testing. The biggest safety variable that I would be worried about testing at home for is lead in the pipes between me and the treatment plant. That includes my house/building and the municipal pipes.
Now taste, that’s a to each their own situation. Sulfury water is my limit for sure. No thanks!
I think hey are talking about the chloramine that Minneapolis uses to disinfect. It is more stable and isn’t just chlorine, so it would be in a “combined” result. The levels are page three of this report https://www2.minneapolismn.gov/media/content-assets/www2-documents/residents/2022-Consumer-Confidence-Report-FINAL.pdf It looks like 2023 isn’t posted yet, but I doubt it changes much year to year.
Are you talking about using chloramine in disinfection? I think conflating pool water and drinking water standards is a bit of a mistake. Things get added to pools from people’s bodies after chlorination that cause weird combined results. Drinking water is disinfected (chlorinated) as a final step. I would object to my municipality using chloramine, but not because I wouldn’t drink it.
The computer is constantly both bricked and not bricked. No way to know until you push the power button
Me talking at dinner: “Will you pass me the peas?” Cut to 5 people confused about whether I mean just one of them or if I want the whole table to all hand me the peas.
I get why they/them can be confusing because of the plural thing, but we are used to a quirky language. With a little practice, the tone and context clear up nearly all confusion. The rest is as easy or hard as what we have to do with an ambiguous “you.”
PS Sorry to the “yous/yous guys” people. I am not trying to turn a blind eye to you obviously superior usage. It just really ruins my point.
Yes, if I said “hand me the scissors” it would just be one tool with two blades. I could also say “hand me a pair of scissors” to mean the same thing. Kind of like how “pair of pants” or “pair of glasses” mean just one of those items. For reference, I am from the US. Not sure if you meant English as the country or as the language. Either way, those usages are nonsense and I will happily keep using them.
Scissor and scissors are interchangeable and mean the same thing. I agree that dropping the plural hurts my brain a little though
Way better: 37% of 72 = 72% of 37
(Or any other numbers)
Totally, my union got us bonuses in our last negotiations. The lower your salary the higher your bonus. The only way to have it be fair at all as I see it.
That would perfect for sure! It pays to keep lab equipment around some times :)
https://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheet/soil-texture-analysis-the-jar-test/ a better description and photos
You can use a methodology from soil testing for this that doesn’t require extra gear. Sieves (like with soil texturing) will give you a faster more accurate answer. Here it is:
Get a narrow glass jar. Fill it a little way with ground coffee. Fill with water. Shake. Set on shelf and wait a few hours up to a day.
The larger pieces will settle first and the finer settle last. You can see the sorting of them through the glass. If you use consistent amounts of coffee and the same container, you can measure depth of layers. I.e. this grinder makes .5cm of fines to 3cm of ideal to .2cm of too large.
Bonus is you can use this method for making cold brew, so you don’t waste the coffee or water.
No kind of expert on the idiomatic use, but the literal translation makes it feel like the monkey is going after something without a plan for where to land. I would expect it to indicate impulsivity
Thanks! It does work for predictive text and correcting while typing, but doesn’t check for misspellings in typed text. Probably good enough
Interesting, it doesn’t “spell check”, but it does suggest words from its own dictionary for predictive text. Maybe I don’t need the checking if I can just look at predicted spellings. Thanks for the thought.
Definitely agree
Thanks! Good to know
Yep, 100% reuse of all wastewater and solids!