It raises the question: can a colony of individual animals (zooids in this case) that work cooperatively be called a singular animal itself? I think biologists say yes, but it’s an interesting taxonomic boundary.
AFAIK, a "super-organism" composed of individual entities is defined as one where the long-term fitness interests of those individuals and their groups are completely and permanently aligned.
For example an ant colony is a super-organism. That’s why it makes sense for a soldier ant to die for her queen.
Some of the "entities" aren't aligned always, like when a person is pregnant for example. I think also our (human) cells doesn't operate as semi-autonomous agents with independent nervous systems and agency, unlike a ant colony.
We think cows are singular animals, despite being made up of lots of different organisms with different DNA. (Much of the diversity happening in the gut.)
"Lynx" can refer to either the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) specifically, or to the genus Lynx and the four extant species in it (Eurasian lynx, Canada lynx, Iberian lynx, bobcat). And the game recognizes all the four lynx species as distinct animals if you use the full names. In general it understands imprecise common/genus names as hypernyms of the more precise species names, which is the correct way to do it IMO.
In general, of course, even distantly related animals may share a common name due to superficial similarities – what is "robin", for example? The American robin was named after the European robin by analogy, simply because both happen to have a red breast. The two species aren't even in the same family.
Likewise, it wouldn't accept “panther” because “tiger” was already there:
> I assume you mean “panther” in the general sense of any big cat.
Why on Earth would it assume mean that, of all things, rather than “black panther”? If it's gonna be pedantic about it, it could've complained about “leopard” and “jaguar” already being there (which they were) instead of complaining about an animal that nobody in their right mind would call a “panther”.
I believe the poster you're replying to understands that. They're noting that the complaint about panther was curiously because they had already listed tiger, which is practically never called a panther, and not because they already listed leopard, which is a cat that is often called a panther. The statement about meaning "any big cat" I would guess to be a confusion based on the name Pantherinae for the subfamily of Felidae of which all these big cats are part. Though the puma, which as you note is also called a panther, is in the different subfamily, Felinae.
I personally just tend to avoid the word panther, because it very often causes confusion as to which cat you're talking about.
in biological journal, sure - for practical purposes straight up no
if it looks like a jellyfish, stings like a jellyfish and behaves like a jellyfish - then it doesn't matter what it looks like under a microscope, it is jellyfish
Portuguese Man o' Wars look distinct enough from jellyfish. Their sails make parts of their bodies float above water, something no jellyfish can do to my knowledge. I can confuse species of jellyfish but there's no confusing the man o' wars...
Many people now know that a tomato is a fruit, and will distinguish it with exactly the 'did you know a tomato is not a vegetable?' fun fact, so I'm not sure this is a great point. If someone asked me to list vegetables and they were being rigorous about it I wouldn't list a tomato. If they're not being rigorous about it then anything goes really - sometimes you can put things like apples in a salad so that must be a vegetable as well.
Botanically, there are no such things as vegetables. The classification of a thing as a "vegetable" is strictly a culinary distinction. Cucumbers, tomatoes, apples, oranges, they're all the fruit of the plant, but the first two are culinarily classified as vegetables and the last two as fruits.
Also, salad is a preparation method, specifically the chopping of ingredients and the application of a sauce to make a semi homogeneous dish. It is not strictly a dish of chopped vegetables, so putting apples "in a salad" doesn't mean the apple is being used as a vegetable. You can put meat in a salad and it doesn't make the meat a vegetable. Tuna salad can be made with no vegetables at all.
In modern English, most people use "vegetable" with its current culinary meaning.
In earlier centuries, "vegetable" still had mostly its original meaning taken from Latin, where "Vegetabilia", as used e.g. by Linnaeus for the "vegetabile regnum", referred to any living beings capable of growth, but incapable of motion, i.e. mainly to the terrestrial plants.
Strictly speaking, seeds, grains, nuts, fruits, roots, bulbs, leaves, stems, etc. are all parts of vegetables.
What in English is now called "vegetables" corresponds to the Latin word "holera", whose original meaning was "greens", and not at all with the Latin word "vegetabilia". Also English "fruits" does not correspond with Latin "fructa", but with Latin "poma". Latin "fructa" referred to the useful results of some activity, a sense still encountered more rarely in English.
This old sense is encountered, like in your example, but much more often "fruits" is used in the culinary sense.
Many people perceive your example as a metaphor, the results of the labor being compared with the fruits of a tree, but in reality the direction of the metaphor has historically been opposite, the fruits of the tree being called thus because they were considered the useful results of its cultivation.
Apples are not fruit in the strict botanical sense.
> Apples are considered "accessory fruits" (or sometimes termed "false fruits") rather than true botanical fruits because the fleshy, edible part develops primarily from the flower's hypanthium or receptacle, not just the ovary. The actual, true fruit is the core containing the seeds, making it a pome.
These discussions are really fun to me. The opportunities to be absurdly pedantic are almost endless. Common words for things gloss over so many details. Most of the time those details aren't important but they still exist and there's someone on the internet that cares deeply about them.
My wife is a biologist, and as I understand biology on an academic level is just near-constant arguments about seemingly basic terms and concepts.
Life, species, gene, organism - we don’t actually have consistent definitions of what those are. Biology is the science of fluid spectrums, so any rigid classification you’d propose breaks down at the edges.
We must accept that most people are careless in their choice of words, so they frequently do not use the words in their strict sense but they use them in a broad sense, instead of using the most appropriate word.
However this is annoying, because especially with the modern fashion that linguistics shall be only descriptive and not prescriptive, like in the past, many words have become more and more ambiguous.
For this reason, misunderstandings have become more and more frequent, especially when using a medium like an Internet forum, which forces conciseness. Now, if you want to be certain that you will be understood correctly, more and more often you are forced to first define exactly many of the words that you intend to use, because the same words may be used by others with different meanings, even if in earlier literature everybody used only the meaning that you want.
I wouldn't blame people. 'Fruit' is a perfectly fine English word.
I would blame botanists for overloading everyday terms with their own specialised meanings.
Mathematicians are also prone to this, but I guess it's less likely someone will mix up a ring or field in the everyday sense and in the mathematical sense.
According to Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304 (1893) a tomato is a vegetable, so the riourous may need to account for that in the appropriate jurisdictions, especially if tarrifs are on the line, or at least to rember to have bigger lawyers than the competition. Also a carrot is a fruit (in EU, for purposes of jam classification), "I can't believe that superhero doll is not a doll", etc.
I added "kudu", a type of antilope, and it replaced it with "turtle". I don't know the relationship between the 2, but it doesn't pass a toddler's sniff test!
The body doesn't store protein in any real capacity. Fat is stored in adipose tissue and carbs in glycogen, but protein must be available in the bloodstream when needed for muscle maintenance and synthesis.
Even if you up your dietary protein during the feeding window, if you're fasting for lengthy periods of time where the protein has already been utilized for fuel, then the muscles are starved and catabolic. There's no passive protein depot built into our physiology muscles can pull from.
Is it possible some of the area it uses protein from is old cells? I'm thinking parts of digestive system, immune system, old cells it scrubs and reclaims some protein from when fasting. Still catabolic but useful catabolic?
It is called autophagy and happens regularly in our body, but in very small amount. Do experiece greater results, you need prolonged fasting (3-5 days)
I use a Pixel 5a with GrapheneOS with full storage encryption and even when it stops getting updates no matter the security situation I don't plan on upgrading at all if ever, I already don't want any banking or authentication to rely on a phone so that's not a big issue. Of course I still have machines at home running Windows XP (updated to 2019 albeit) so do not listen to me on security.
Contrary to seemingly everyone here I'm not exposed to state level threats so I couldn't care less, as long as Google maps give me my direction and Spotify plays my song I'm ok
Geez, what a negative take on a company who do their best to be environment-friendly.
I got quite some corrosion on the headphone jack of my Raspberry Pi 2B. Not sure why. But either way, these adapters can be bought anywhere, and they'll work on other devices as well. Like I said, I didn't use mine much. Usually Bluetooth with an adequate profile is good enough. I doubt people hear the difference between Bluetooth adequate profile and 3.5 mm in a double blind test.
Apple's omission was the same garbage about complexity and space, yet no one in the real world had these problems. Apple is making a killing on Bluetooth accessories and adapters which have a much much higher markup than phones. Do you buy that SD cards or removable batteries were "too complicated" and bloaty for the end-user too?
If you're trying to differente yourself from Apple, it seems like a no brainer to include a jack especially since USB ports are needed for charging, battery case accessories, data transfer etc. all of which can't be done while listening to music.
On top of that, a "wobbly" USB port is like the top issue with phones outside of a cracked screen and an analog port is way more resilient to always being plugged in while in your pocket than any USB adapter ever will be.
My wired headset is going to outlive whatever bluetooth sealed-in battery garbage "works today until it doesn't" too so "environmentally friendly" needs an asterisk.
This is Fairphone playing copy apple. You can like Fairphone and their mission, but giving them a pass here is just playing into marketing bs.
An always plugged in port risks damage and a damaged USB port makes your phone a brick, not so for an analog port that is inarguably more resilient.
Every major vendor's earbuds and most of their headsets aren't battery-replacable. This complexity moves outside the phone and onto the user when all of this was handled reliably by "lesser" hardware of yore. None of this makes Bluetooth headsets an impossibility.
SD Card upsells are so obviously upsells, come on. Yes using shoddy peripherals can lead to a bad experience and they're replaceable for a reason. You seem to be going out of your way to bias the corporate position. Using low quality batteries risks far more, should Fairphone epoxy their batteries in to save the customer from that too?
Killing of the aux port was an Apple signature move. Whether or not the case looks like Samsung is not the true legacy of this courageous stance.
> An always plugged in port risks damage and a damaged USB port makes your phone a brick, not so for an analog port that is inarguably more resilient.
Doubt it, there is no data to support this with regards to Fairphone 4 and 5. You'd think that if there was a negative data point on that, there'd be tons and tons of CS reports on it. On the contrary; Fairphone 4 has very little CS support requirement and returns. In contrast to other phones, as well as Fairphone 2 (which was, by Fairphone's own [paraphrased] words, a CS disaster).
Either way, the USB-C port on Fairphone 4 and 5 is easily replaced.
> SD Card upsells are so obviously upsells, come on. Yes using shoddy peripherals can lead to a bad experience and they're replaceable for a reason.
eMMC is more reliable. Practically everyone is using these consumer grade (micro)SD cards. You get what you pay for.
> Every major vendor's earbuds and most of their headsets aren't battery-replacable.
Oh that is weird cause this guide is marked as Easy and a major brand [1]
You need the phone upside down in your pocket to plug it in and a new USB headset to boot. The Apple and Samsungs of the world in their ubiquity have changed the ecosystem.
It's not surprising that if you make using my old headset difficult, I and millions of others will move to buying a wireless alternative — they're counting on it. That's what happened and the sales numbers mirror that. People throw away way more audio equipment today than they ever have.
The fact that these Sony earbuds happen to be replaceable is quite a bit different than them being _designed_ as user-replicable. You found a community member that uploaded a video showing you how to do it, now show me the manufacturer's documentation explaining how it's done.
This exists for watches and cameras, but we have been lulled into throwing battery operated things away as a cultural migration pattern and Fairphone is aware and complicit in this indirectly and unnecessarily.
I get it, you either work for or just really dig Fairphone. Glad you found a company you like so much.
> It's not surprising that if you make using my old headset difficult, I and millions of others will move to buying a wireless alternative — they're counting on it. That's what happened and the sales numbers mirror that. People throw away way more audio equipment today than they ever have.
Hehe, well there's converters which add Bluetooth to devices like keyboards. Surely you can get one to work on your 3.5 mm device so you're up to par? /runs
Honestly, I've been a 3.5 mm user for a lot of years in my life, and I actually love listening to my little WF-1000XM3. In fact, they're more safe to wear before I fall asleep. Because I won't be able to suffocate due to wires. Also, back in those days where I often used 3.5 mm cables I often had cable breakage at the choke points (point of entry and near the speakers). I used to burn through a couple of headsets a year as kid! I'm not missing that at all. But cool enough, Fairphone actually had a 3.5 mm headphones where you could detach the cable to replace it. And a third example: with ambient sound I can do stuff like dishes, open front door, or make up my bed without using a wire and without being attached to anything.
Do you know about VR by chance? Do people like being connected with VR, or do they prefer to be not connected? The latter ehhh..? Cause it is more convenient, that is why.
> The fact that these Sony earbuds happen to be replaceable is quite a bit different than them being _designed_ as user-replicable. You found a community member that uploaded a video showing you how to do it, now show me the manufacturer's documentation explaining how it's done.
I don't give a shit what Sony's take on it is. iFixit guide is enough for me.
> This exists for watches and cameras
Both of which are type of device which is now redundant.
> I get it, you either work for or just really dig Fairphone. Glad you found a company you like so much.
shrug and you're on the of them 3.5 mm loudmouths? :)
Redundant? Smart watches exist and camera (phones) exist. They're both worse off today in the repair department _by design_, not coincidence or necessity. I still have both (non smart versions) I use specifically because of their repairability.
Planned obsolescence is baked into the marketing strategy. Fairphone realizes this but capitulated to sell peripherals, toeing Apple's talking points.
Companies taking a principled stance on repair is how repairs actually get done not the random customer finding an out-of-band way to increase the longevity of their hardware by trawling iFix it.
It is true though, lest we forget that Samsung managed to make the Galaxy S5 IP67 water resistant... this phone meanwhile is IP57 rated, which is actually even worse. If they tell you "it's harder with the headphone jack" that's not a good enough reason either, just try harder; it's not worth omitting when we know it is possible.
Samsung was able to pull this off with the S5 A DECADE AGO:
- removable back
- removable battery
- headphone jack
- SD card slot
- IP67 water resistant
This is an anti-environment moneygrab plain and simple. They omit the headphone jack so that they sell you the solution, which just so happens to be their brand of wireless headphones, dongle, whatever... if you actually like FairPhone you'd criticize them over this bullocks instead of being an uncritical parrot.
And to be fair, those phones quickly got to the point where the flap over the USB port would break or not seal. And the back would get loose, because Samsung ruined the OS so it needed frequent battery removed reboots. And the finger print sensor wouldn't work if your finger had been near water in the last 12 hours. So it had constant warnings about the above.
The S8 I had was the low point of Android ownership for me.
> If there is space for 3.5mm you might have a point.
I don't think you get it. The reason why there isn't any space for 3.5mm now is because they didn't want to add it, they could add the space if they so choose. This is not a problem you should think about, it should be the designer/engineer/etc's concern to figure out how to fit it in.
It is normal for there to not be any space in portable electronics, that just means they've utilized all the space they had optimally; it doesn't mean they can't add more features and redesign it to accommodate the jack.
I personally know absolutely no one with a dongle. I know many people who still use phones with jack that are not using it (or have earbuds). I was using wireless headphones before anyone heard of "earbuds" - they are much more convenient in situations where I'm using headphones. Of course, it's anecdotal but it seems that there are much more people like me/my friends than people missing Jack...
IMO the biggest utility of a headphone jack is not for earbuds, it's that it enables you to play music from your phone on basically any device made in the last 30 years. Want to hook up to some random stereo? No problem, you can do it. Want to play music in your car, but you have one of the many cars without Bluetooth? Easy. There's a lot to be said for having a damn near universal audio connector. Bluetooth is nice, but it's not there yet in terms of ubiquity.
My personal use case for the headphone jack is playing music in my car. My car doesn't even have an aux input (I have to use a cassette adapter), let alone Bluetooth. And when I'm on a long drive, being able to play music while charging is a must. I will only very rarely hook up a pair of wired earbuds to my phone, but I absolutely must have a headphone jack.
I'm not claiming that there is no use for Jack. I just think that this is a niche and doesn't require a separate connector in every smartphone. Having a universal connector that can be used for various niche scenarios is IMO enough. We should push for improvements in that regard (e.g. make it easy to charge the phone and use the dongle at the same time).
I wish I had the same problem as you do with your car. Mine is old enough that it doesn't have Bluetooth (I'm not the first owner and Bluetooth was an "extra" in this model) but new enough that there is no cassette player (and no built-in aux input) :)
Only if you think in absolutes. We shouldn't; we should view the issue in birdview, pragmatically with all pros and cons. The people for whom 3.5mm is a dealbreaker are loud, but seem rather minor if we look at the general market.
Regulations that create exceptions for key big players entrench them further and their poor business practices against competitors that wish to usurp their market dominance. New entrants have to play by the rules, but established ones get preferential treatment.
Yeah I got a Pinephone for this exact peripheral and it doesn't even correctly fit the size of the phone. Not universal for all their phones so beware.
How did yours not fit? The body of the OG and Pro Pinephones are the exact same, it's only the internals that are different. I literally use the back cover from my OG Pinephone for my Pro, and am hanging onto my dead Pinephone for spare parts, should I ever break the screen on my Pro.
My keyboard accessory fits both of my PinePhones and my PinePhone Pro - it's not easy to put it in or out, but that makes it stay in and not fall out accidentaly.
That said, in mine the accesories battery no longer charges, so there are definitely issues with the keyboard accessory aside from being humongous.
Same. I didn't miss an email confirmation or anything. They're very aware of me in the "queue". Contacting support on a monthly basis gets the same answer. I have to wait for some arbitrary deadline on "current pre-orders" and they are unsure about when that'll happen, but are definitely sure it WILL happen... eventually.
It took the man o war, but crossed out Jellyfish and said "added a vaguer term", but a jellyfish and a man-o-war are discrete animals.
The man-o-war is a colonial siphonophore composed of zooids, while a jellyfish is a singular marine organism.
They're both in the phylum Cnidaria, and that would have been a more vague term had I entered it.