amio

It does. Heat conduction is faster when the temperature difference is large. Air soaks up a lot of heat, so still air is a poor heat conductor. If you're blowing it around, you're increasing the amount of fresh, colder air that can interact with the food.

One spoonful and a couple of breaths is small enough stuff to have a relatively small effect and a lot of error margin, though.

nothin personnel, kid

I just thought "hur hur, Nazeem" and save scumming skill checks, dice rolls and tricky input in mostly singleplayer games, without any nasty precedence or concurrency issues. Extending it to multiplayer and also being inside the game seems, uh, complicated. I'll give it an undercaffeinated try:

Each player gets an individual "marker" they can place at their current time, and a function to restore the entire universe state to that point.
"Whose marker is when" seems like it needs to be part of that state. Otherwise, reverting and then having someone else reload a formerly earlier, now future/orphaned state... just sounds like a clusterfuck. Or it's unproblematic and just weird, I'm not sure.

Keeping memories across reloads would at least not happen "naturally", since everyone has their exact brain state reverted. You could just say it does for the purposes of the experiment, but it seems like it makes things more complicated.
At least, remembering stuff through someone else's reload is right out: everyone on the planet quickly ends up with a bunch of memories that have no longer happened, and no way to tell what's what. Psych horror time!

Whoever saves first does get to revert everything since then, but assuming no memory retention, you could still safely shit talk your boss all day long, at least. If their checkpoint reverts yours, they will forget the rant, you can still revert. It would be further back than you intended then, but you would be blissfully unaware of that fact. Of course, you also wouldn't remember the rant, so it doesn't sound very cathartic either.

But, if memories are retained, Boss could reload on you - they now remember the rant and you don't, which sounds like a bad Christmas Party. While reloading would still be a win for you, you wouldn't know to actually do it, and could risk saving at a position where you've screwed yourself. Common risk of save scumming.

Saves, especially save states/quicksave. Some kind of way to tell you what is actually the correct answer, not just what someone thinks is, or wants to be, the correct answer. Enough predictability to give you a reasonable shot at things.

I get the parallels between the characters, but I'm not sure how that makes anything more nuanced. Seems like a reach, with kinda specious arguments. The worldbuilding is impressive in many ways, but it does lay out a fairly clear cut line of good beings and evil beings/groups. Good individuals may fall to evil through temptation, or can be misguided, and it's up to select, particularly self-sacrificing champions to fix the issue. There is also a certain factor of redemption. Tolkien was, after all, a Christian.

... and this was, after all, an early and even genre-defining work. It is fine for it to not carry all the grit and subversion of conventional morality we've gotten used to since then. In fact it's influential enough to be part of why there's anything to even subvert. I don't think there's any need to bend over backwards to find more meaning than there is: fanon from Le Guin is still fanon.

I'm seeing a lot of uncited claims. If these are just conjecture or opinion you could be clearer on it. If they're not, citing sources is probably a good idea.

If the word triggers some symptom, then why would that same word, "hidden" by a trick that wouldn't faze a six-year-old, be any less harmful?

This is an outrage.

I have absolutely no idea. "So how have you been doing since ruining my life? IV drug abuse? That's awesome, man, heard about that one through the grapevine and it gave me some... well, not joy, of course, but definitely a bit of grim satisfaction. Maybe there's something to this karma thing after all, eh?"

Which inaccurate doomer myths? Because every time I hear this, it's "well, I'm sure that'll be ni-aaaaaaand it's climate denialism"

Well, at least people were saved from terrible tra*ma by cl*verly h*ding the "u" in "ab*sive". Can't tell that's what it says at all...

So?