usage, production and sorting is on them

Plastic is a finite resource that is not going to disappear from global usage any time soon.

Just fucking recycle.

These statements are you throwing up your hands, but towards the actual problem of plastic waste.

“where I live they don’t do it well”

Where I live is on Earth, they don’t do it well anywhere here. In the US, people have been actively trying to get people to recycle more since the 70s, plastic recovery from recycling barely gets over 5% and that’s consistent throughout that 50 year period. That’s not just “not 100%” that’s dismal.

As an initiative it has been wildly unsuccessful at best, and a cynical distraction at worst. The plastics industry is largely the same entities as the oil and gas industry, and they have run the same playbook to defer meaningful action against their damaging products.

To bring it back: People not recycling plastics is equivalent to people not eating their pizza crusts in that they are trivial and ineffectual solutions to the problems of waste.

Waste management experts say the problem with plastic is that it is expensive to collect and sort. There are now thousands of different types of plastic, and none of them can be melted down together. Plastic also degrades after one or two uses. Greenpeace found the more plastic is reused the more toxic it becomes.

New plastic, on the other hand, is cheap and easy to produce. The result is that plastic trash has few markets — a reality the public has not wanted to hear.

From the NPR source I listed earlier. Industry has no interest or ability in fixing this issue by recycling, and vanishingly few municipalities are likely to subsidize plastics recycling to a level at which it makes an appreciable dent in plastic waste.

The plastics industry has cynically forwarded the idea of plastics recycling despite knowing it was unfeasible. We need to drastically reduce plastic use, and probably limit the types of plastic produced for the sorting problem to be mitigated enough that recycling or a clean disposal method is feasible.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-plastic-industry-knowingly-pushed-recycling-myth-for-decades-new-report-finds

Plastics recycling doesn’t happen much because it is an expensive process, and new plastic is too cheap. Even if you put it in the blue recycling bin, it’s fairly unlikely that it actually gets recycled and used again.

Metals actively get recycled well. Paper and glass recycle okay, but in practice also face problems.

Some coverage:

https://www.npr.org/2022/10/24/1131131088/recycling-plastic-is-practically-impossible-and-the-problem-is-getting-worse

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/glass-recycling.htm

If it had some other toppings in addition that’d be a hell of a marathon recovery meal

That looks kinda cool, although it does irk me that the pieces seem to not all be tetracubes.

Winky becomes an inconsolable drunk after being freed.

The hogwarts elves cease cleaning the gryffindor common room because they are insulted by Hermione’s leaving knitted caps and sweaters around for them, and generally avoid and shame dobby and winky.

House elves

You are right! There isn’t any indication in the app itself that I could find though; but when I searched it up on google play it says I have classic installed, not standard.

Pretty sure I am using the free version, or if I paid it was a one time thing and long ago but it will walk you thru at least some problems. Example:

Sausage, eggs, home fries, english muffin, milk, oj

Nonono, we had this discussion about the snake yesterday: the tree kills you by dropping a limb on you long before it eats you.

While the food itself looks a little plain for my tastes, the idea is really cute, and I’m willing to hold a 7 year old’s birthday dinner to a different standard than my own cooking. So I’d call this in good taste, and good execution.

I don’t want to argue

Is this true? Doesn’t seem true.

I gave you a reasonable explaination as to why a slight difference in pan volume wasn’t a particularly meaningful criticism of the less voluminous pan, particularly when it has the other characteristic you want: more edges per volume of brownies.

This is maybe as plainly as I can say it, you’ll be able to fit your standard “pan of brownies” recipe in both pans, without folding space, or having to tune your recipe down by some awkward amount. If your recipe can’t fit in one, you probably shouldn’t go single in the other even if you physically can, and are in for multiple pans or cycles anyway.

Originally bringing total pan volume into it confused me, a baking pan has an upper limit to how much brownie you can bake per cycle in it, but by the time you are anywhere near that limit you are probably already better off using a second pan.

The example brownies from the picture are nowhere near that limit, so if there was a moderate but significant decrease in the volume of the pan in the change to the squares It doesn’t seem like it should be a problem even on a per cycle basis. Even so, the cost of doing an additional cycle of baking is not that high anyways.

The main factor in how much volume of brownie you make will be the amount of brownie batter you make. Non-euclidean space isn’t required to bake an additional 25% or so of brownies by volume in that pan, and so your reply seemed snide, and I responded kurtly.

They’re reusable though

Okay, but the volume depends on the batter, not the pan.

Damn Hawaii, you’ve been eating well

Yeah, it somewhere in the edit it flipped, and I didn’t care to change it back

But dymaxion is my favorite

The Beatles are so ubiquitous and generally acclaimed though, you don’t really have to go out of your way to encounter their music or artifice of their cultural legacy. If people always want to argue with you about it, or are obstinate when you would like to listen to something else? Then I can see pretty easily how someone’s distaste for them could grow over time until they would describe it as hate.