Another thing that makes home construction a bit different in this regard is that you could claim to build a house for yourself, live in it for a bit, and then sell it on a couple of years later. That'd be an easy way to avoid or evade taxes. Not so easy with lettuce -- once you've eaten it, you've eaten it.

On my workstation, I run statistical simulations in R which can be wasteful with memory and cause a lot of transient memory pressure, and for that scenario I do like that zswap works alongside regular swap. Especially when combined with the advice from https://makedebianfunagainandlearnhowtodoothercoolstufftoo.c... to wake up kswapd early, it really does seem to make a difference.

That said, if you want it to behave at its best when OOM, it does help to tweak vm.swappiness, vm.watermark_scale_factor, vm.min_free_kbytes, vm.page-cluster and a couple of other parameters.

See e.g.

https://makedebianfunagainandlearnhowtodoothercoolstufftoo.c...

https://documentation.suse.com/sles/15-SP7/html/SLES-all/cha...

I don't know of any good statistics script for zswap, I use the script below as a custom waybar module:

  #!/bin/bash
  stored_pages="$(cat /sys/kernel/debug/zswap/stored_pages)"
  pool_total_size="$(cat /sys/kernel/debug/zswap/pool_total_size)"
  compressed_size_mib="$((pool_total_size / 1024 / 1024))"
  compressed_size_gib="$((pool_total_size / 1024 / 1024 / 1024))"
  compressed_size_mib_remainder="$((compressed_size_mib * 10 / 1024 - compressed_size_gib * 10))"
  uncompressed_size="$((stored_pages * 4096))"
  uncompressed_size_mib="$((uncompressed_size / 1024 / 1024))"
  uncompressed_size_gib="$((uncompressed_size / 1024 / 1024 / 1024))"
  uncompressed_size_mib_remainder="$((uncompressed_size_mib * 10 / 1024 - uncompressed_size_gib * 10))"
  ratio="$((100 * uncompressed_size / (pool_total_size + 1)))"
  echo "$compressed_size_gib.$compressed_size_mib_remainder"

Of course, the parent may also have been referring to getting clients to pay in cash and not putting anything on the books, at the expense of getting barely any pension in the end, but that's not how I read it. This is getting somewhat less common because people are more likely than 20 years ago to get a loan from a bank to pay for renovation work, and the bank will want to see invoices.

The installer also completely broke the Windows partition that came with the workstation even though I was planning on dual booting, but oh well, no great loss there.

Other than that, there are some small conveniences and apps that I miss from MacOS (the mac calendar and mail apps are just so nice!) but the Niri window manager is just so amazing that at this point I don't think there's anything that could make me switch back.

It's just something that statisticians have observed across many fields: you theorize about how potentially huge a particular interaction effect or knock-on effect could be relative to the main effect, you read about the Jevons Paradox and intuitively feel that it can explain so much of the world today... and then you get the data and it just almost never does. No reason why it couldn't, just empirically it rarely happens.

Furthermore, GLP-1 users report having fewer cravings or just reduced appetite in general, whereas what you describe would require some sort of "calorie reduction pill" which would allow people to lose weight without altering their relationship to food. But that pill does not exist.

You'll find a lot of papers from, say, the '70s, with a grand total of maybe 10 references, all of them to crucial prior work, and if those references don't say what the author claims they should say (e.g. that the particular method that is employed is valid), then chances are that the current paper is weaker than it seems, or even invalid, and so it is extremely important to check those references.

Then the internet came along, scientists started padding their work with easily found but barely relevant references and journal editors started requiring that even "the earth is round" should be well-referenced. The result is that peer reviewers feel that asking them to check the references is akin to asking them to do a spell check. Fair enough, I agree, I usually can't be bothered to do many or any citation checks when I am asked to do peer review, but it's good to remember that this in itself is an indication of a perverted system, which we just all ignored -- at our peril -- until LLM hallucinations upset the status quo.