This article is not about a livestock feed, it's about creating a pasture polyculture that reduces the need for nitrogen fertilizer application.
The 60% claim is "in comparison with pastures without the use of nitrogen fertilization." And of course only applies to the region and cattle breed they studied, not to mention only cattle raised on pasture in the first place.
It's not claiming to be a magic growth tonic for all cattle. Though I agree the title is a bit exaggerated and invites misinterpretation.
This general topic was discussed quite a bit when Groupon was a thing. The coupons brought in people who were pretty much only there for the discount, tipped poorly, and generally didn't become repeat customers. They weren't looking for a new place. They were looking for a deal.
ADDED: Per another comment, there is probably an angle whereby a free trial is the necessary nudge for someone to try something they'd be willing to pay full price for if they liked it. But I didn't get that distinction between those two modes from this short piece.
These blogs (kottke.org , memex 1.1) offer daily-ish roundups of links and articles they find interesting, with a short (50-100 words) intro as to why the reader may also be interested. I don't like using email newsletters (my inbox is flooded enough), and long lists of urls is off-putting.
Are there any other blogs that do something similar?
I've asked this elsewhere recently but here it goes again.
Im sure Im wrong, but wouldnt it make sense to start with like "all rice, bean, potatoes, and broccoli consumption at the personal level is free" and start with a food stamp / ebt that buys unlimited of something very specific? It wouldnt be a currency thats worth trading to other people, landlords couldnt collect ebt credits in lieu of rent, because everyone would already have unlimited.
I guess I dont understand why UBI proponents think CASH is the best idea, compared to more specific tiers like "600 for healthy food, 100 to treat yourself, 300 for xxxxx." I guess I also find it confusing why it has to be nothing or 100% without any sort of gradual experimentation. Why does the program have to immediately ramp up to the full plan?
I don't quite think you understand the point of a support role. People who support me do a lot of innovation, fixing what isn't broken, and all of that. Most are highly empowered and I expect a few to take serious leadership roles in the organization, depending on seniority.
The primary question is one of purpose: someone in a support role is hired to keep me effective and productive, and evaluated on their ability to do so. I am their customer. If I win, they win.
The goal of IT isn't good systems architecture or innovation -- it's me. Supporting me well often requires good systems architecture and innovation. It also requires compromising those at times to my goals, having clean transition strategies, and similar choices as well. Those decisions are made based on their impact on me.
"Open sewer"... pretty much. Then again, at some point most people are going to figure out that it's true of most big social media platforms. Anything which connects to you to the teeming mass of humanity is thrilling, then tiresome, then downright corrosive; there are just too many trolls, nuts, and dim bulbs to be borne.
The 60% claim is "in comparison with pastures without the use of nitrogen fertilization." And of course only applies to the region and cattle breed they studied, not to mention only cattle raised on pasture in the first place.
It's not claiming to be a magic growth tonic for all cattle. Though I agree the title is a bit exaggerated and invites misinterpretation.