But it sure is a hell of a lot easier THINKING you’re going to die while on psychedelics!
I can’t handle drugs (as much as I’m curious about them) but I had a “smoked waaaay too much pot”experience in college where I was high for almost 24 hours and I spent the first six hours or so convinced I had broken my brain and was going to die.
I think you have to balance that against the fact that the recreational dose of lsd is so infinitesimal that 10000x that dose is still very easy to ingest in the blink of an eye. Not so for alcohol.
That said, even after reading wikipedia's source on the ld50 of lsd, I remain unconvinced that there even is a lethal dose of LSD.
An excerpt from the highest ever recorded dosage of LSD.
"Eight individuals who accidentally consumed a very high dose of LSD intranasally (mistaking it for cocaine) had plasma levels of 1000–7000 μg per 100mL blood plasma and suffered from comatose states, hyperthermia, vomiting, light gastric bleeding, and respiratory problems. However, all survived with hospital treatment and without residual effects."
There are other forms of danger apart from lethality, and before new recreational (or therapeutic) drugs can be accepted by society, those need to be culturally understood.
If a NodeJS application accepts a value from the client application, but validates against an early call (e.g. min 25 mins from now) the Infinity value can bypass that validation.
Because it's a relatively unknown side effect, most validations probably wouldn't check for Infinity.
Plus although Infinity pops off the timer at 0 seconds, a validation based on millisecond math would fail because Infinity > 25 minutes in milliseconds.
Modeling themselves after the US Congress, itself modeled after the British Parliament (House of Commons and House of Lords).
I personally believe bicameral legislatures - allowing houses to deadlock on a bill - are a terrible idea. Either unicameral (used by one US State, Nebraska) or tricameral legislatures, with 2 out of 3 houses needing to approve a bill for it to pass, make much more sense.
I think some state legislatures actually predated to federal one. I know some states had constitutions before the US did, but I don't know if they included the legislature structure.
Why only one house or three? What exactly would that fix? Sure you eliminate most deadlock, but how does that representation? Also, is deadlock really a bad thing in all scenarios?
That only begins to make sense if it's actually modeled on the US Congress, with proportional representation in one chamber and specific representation of subdivisions in the other, but to have two chambers both with proportional representation, as California has, makes no sense.
Using the USA congress it was viewed a compromise between having reps for the people aka "democracy" and the Senate preventing the tragedy of the commons with a more "stable", less influenced by the populace groups of reps who would be more intellectual and conservative. They would represent the states at large (population not being a metric) rather than districts in the states more of a "republic" idea. That's why you'll hear the USA called a Democratic Republic and why idiots who say "we're a republic and not a democracy!" are almost completely wrong.
It makes plenty sense. It was meant for the Senate to tame the more erratic decisions of the House of Representatives. However, since the GOP has become what is essentially a fascist party with a Mango Messiah, no amount of balance is currently possible.
