I don't see in the article what percentage of this increased 'value' was actually spent on stocks. It seems such a house of cards to say the unrealised value of retained holdings is worth anything like the figure you get if applying the most recent trade's value to all existing shares. A value beyond a percentage of the company's assets and projected yield makes for a pretty risky game of hot potato for anyone buying in at the end and the potential for ridiculously overblown paper losses for anyone who got in at the start of the pyramid scheme with knock-on effects that propagate out to the real economy through the contagion of doomsaying. Bonds are a far more transparent way of raising funds and incentivise productive endeavours with good fundamentals as the company needs to pay from profits rather than offloading rewards to the system of finding another sucker (which can happen with bonds as well if sold before maturity in the belief that the issuer will be unable to fulfill their promise).

Mr. Inbetween https://m.imdb.com/title/tt7472896/

Yes, I liked the interface of Jellyfin as a more family friendly media browsing UI but I hate the wasted CPU cycles of transcoding unnecessarily.

For something in-between, there's https://winstall.app/

It's a bit of a roundabout way to get your micronutrients https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/animal-feed-additives-market unless you're conflating subsistence farming with the bulk of production and consumption.

See page 12 of https://www.fao.org/3/a0701e/a0701e01.pdf in terms of feedstock percentages at that time (total production has doubled since then https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/animal-feed-industry-grow-up-due-rising-consumption-aqua-waghmare )

Over a third of crops are grown to feed livestock, and that's if you're not counting pasture as a crop, which it absolutely is - arguably our first solar powered factory floor. Even areas that were grazed in the past have had the relative proportion of native flora and fauna severely reduced to minimal levels through introduced grasses and overgrazing. To get a feel for land use against calorie production, you could have a browse through https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/ for an overview.

Food is grown specifically to feed livestock though, it would be a pretty weird trophic pyramid for them to survive on our waste unless you went back to a time where people killed their one pig for the year and salted it away. In our country, the land degradation from clearing hill country for grazing has led to enormous biodiversity loss and a self-fufilling prophecy of eroded weak topsoil that people claim isn't good for anything else (though it could still be rewilded and in other cultures and times would be terraced and swaled to support plant crops).

After you've skimmed the water off, then towel dried inside the shower, the bathmat barely needs to get wet, especially if you step onto your towel when getting out.

Bathrooms should have a floor drain regardless of whether they are of the wet variety. I personally hate the concept of a wet bathroom and the behaviour it encourages. Stuff gets wet that shouldn't, it just makes everything harder and expands the scope of cleaning while compromising "dry" tasks after someone else has used the shower if they partake in the undisciplined behaviour the design encourages. Also not a fan of all the functions being in one room.

My favourite Windows is still 2000.

To the commenters justifying the written form MM-DD-YYYY on the basis of preferring to say the name of the month followed by the day (which the written numerical sequence does not preclude you from doing). If someone were to say something like "the time is a quarter to eleven" do you think they would have a case for writing it 45:10? And if so, how would you deal with the ambiguity of "ten past ten" if they wrote it 10:10 instead of 10:10?