Dear Olympus,

In under the wire! So I wouldn’t say that Malta is my favorite travel destination of all time, but we had a blast there and I’ve been recommending it to people since. Some of the highlights:

• It’s small, so you can easily see the whole island in just a few days 
• Good public transportation, so you don’t have to rent a car
• Great food, especially if you like seafood—but if you’re like me and you don’t you can still enjoy all manner of pastries
• Lots of historical attractions from many different eras; I expected to (and did) enjoy the medieval Arab towns, but I was also impressed by the baroque architecture of Valletta and the megalithic temples like Hagar Qim
• It’s English-speaking, which made navigating it fairly easy, but also Maltese-speaking, so you get to listen to a foreign language (and such an interesting one, too!)
• The scenery on the island itself isn’t the greatest, but the Mediterranean is gorgeous and there are lots of good swimming spots
• It’s close to other places that are interesting (we used it as a jumping-off point to visit Tunisia and Sicily)

I recently recommended it to my cousin and his wife for a trip with their one year old, and they really enjoyed it too, so I guess it‘s also kid friendly. (I was four months pregnant when we visited so it’s fetus-friendly too...which mostly meant that we could find tasty snacks quite readily.)

I hope you make it there someday!

- Petra  

Dear reader,

For those too lazy to click: The original question asks for writers' Twitter accounts.

I'm not going to put my personal Twitter handle here, but I'm happy to give it out to individual readers who send me an email.

I will give you the Twitter account where I post random pictures of trains that I take from my back yard, conclusively proving that I am both secretly five years old and an extremely huge nerd.

-yayfulness

Dear Dear Dear Dear,

Yeah, sure why not. Anonymity is for the birds. I'm on Twitter at @pwitt27. Surprise—I mostly, and infrequently, tweet about TV and movies. (I'm also on Letterboxd, which is like Goodreads but for movies, at @pwitt27.)

See y'all around the internet.

-Art Vandelay

Dear AM,

1. Yes!

2. I have a bunch of podcasts on my phone right now, but it's hard to find time to listen, so I listen pretty spottily. Some of the ones I've listened to lately are The Buttpod (Brent Butt, of Corner Gas), NPR's Pop Culture Happy Hour, ID10T with Chris Hardwick (sometimes there's lots of language on that one, but his interview style is incredible), Armchair Expert with Dax Shepherd (same), Welcome to Night Vale, Slow Burn: A Podcast about Watergate (I haven't listened to very much of that one yet, but I've had it recommended to me from multiple people because I am a Watergate aficionado), and the Protagonist Podcast. 

3. I usually listen at night when I'm driving somewhere or while my husband is doing other things, or while I'm cleaning if one child is out at a playdate or something while the other is asleep. I pretty much listen to none of them while kids are around, because even when a podcast is squeaky clean, all of these are still produced for adults and since my kids are little, I kind of want to know what they are going to hear just in case there are topics I'm not expecting. Plus, I am usually interacting with the kids when they are there - I can't really pay attention to podcasts when I am busy answering a flood of why questions...

I also love a lot of live NPR shows that are available as podcasts, but I hear them live more often.

-Olympus

Dear Kvothe,

I literally just discovered this one four days ago but... MY DREAM GRAD PROGRAM (Securities Studies at Georgetown) HAS A PODCAST AND IT IS AMAZING! They talk about conflict termination, the history of American intelligence, cyber-terrorism, and so much more! 

Sincerely,
The Soulful Ginger

Dear Am,

I really only listen to The Moth and Wait Wait ... Don't Tell Me!, and not that often. I have a child, and I usually listen while driving or doing housework.

-El-ahrairah

G'Day Lady Doomfiyah,

Thank you. So, so glad you asked this question as it finally gave me a chance to write about The Leftovers  and prompted me to rewatch the final five episodes today to best answer your question about the ending. In Board Question #91291 I gave a quick description about the show's premise, which I'll include again here for those unfamiliar with The Leftovers (2014-2017).

The Leftovers (HBO): On October 14, 2011, two percent of the world's population simultaneously and instantaneously disappears without explanation. The show is about those left behind stuck dealing with the fallout. This show tracks how different people respond to religion, logic, and science failing us collectively. It's about the all-consuming nature of grief and limits of faith. The show is made by Damon Lindelof of Lost fame and stars Justin Theroux, Carrie Coon, Christopher Eccleston, Liv Tyler, Amy Brenneman, and many other greats in more limited roles. Based on the Tom Perrotta novel of the same name, the author of which is heavily involved in the show as well. Top five favorite TV show of all time for me.

The only thing I'd add to my own blurb is that the show tracks not only how people respond to the limits of religion, logic, and science, but also the precarious nature of stability and sanity as well. Those are the broad, broad strokes. More specifically it tracks a handful of people in a small New York town dealing with life after the "Sudden Departure," the name given to the rapture-like disappearance of 2% of the world. What is so tricky about the Departure is that there is seemingly no rhyme or reason to who got disappeared. Good people, like the reverend Matt Jamison (Christopher Eccleston) remained behind while known bad people were included in those who vanished. The Departure is such a great metaphor for mental illness because it doesn't care who you are or what you did; it just shows up one day and you better learn how to live with it.

My thoughts, opinions, and feelings about this show are inseparably intertwined with my own experiences with less than ideal mental health and a personal faith crisis. It wasn't long after watching season 1 in 2015 that I was belatedly diagnosed with clinical depression and was by then years into my faith spiral. Season 1 is essentially a 10-episode attempt by the showrunners to simulate depression in the viewer. (A move, which worked like gangbusters on me, that was later acknowledged by Damon Lindelof to be perhaps too big an ask of casual viewers, which is one of the reasons why this show has had such a small cultural footprint so far.) So, you can imagine a show touching on so many topics so close to my exposed nerve endings would move me from a receptive and critical watching position to one where I'm easier to move/manipulate emotionally. (See also any mother with young kids dying of cancer story like Finding Neverland, Terms of Endearment, and even Guardians of the Galaxy. And if you want to really get into a serious feelings talk with me let's talk why mother! was my favorite film of 2017.)

What makes The Leftovers so special is that even though my objectivity is essentially shot with this show, The Leftovers is still considered by many, many invested TV viewers to be among the best shows made in recent history. Every year the website Uproxx (and previously HitFix) polls professional TV critics on their favorite shows. In season 1 (2014) it was voted #10, in season 2 (2015) it was voted #7, and in season 3 (2017) it was voted #1 and by a wide margin. And generally speaking those TV critics poll results track with the show's increasing quality season to season, though I do slightly favor season 2 over 3 and enjoy season 1 more than many critics did. 

As a viewer I'm not so far pulled into the "omg this is meeeee" space that I still can't recognize and appreciate the impeccable and jaw-dropping directing, acting, and writing all over this show. When you rewatch it you notice that thing where important lines or story beats have multiple meanings, layers, or echos to the bigger narrative in the same satisfying way that Mad Men did. Like Lindelof did with Lost, starting in season 1, and perfected in seasons 2 and 3, The Leftovers would focus in on one character's storyline for the length of the episode. Occasionally a season or episode will start by dropping us in someplace far away in time and space from the main cast to present an arty vignette that provides a thematic taste for the episode or season to come. For everyone involved, on both sides of the camera, it is the best thing they've ever done. To mix a few metaphors, this show takes the biggest swings I've ever seen a TV show take and it hits pay dirt almost every time. 

Ok. So now lets get into answering your questions and move into spoiler territory so Lady Doomfiyah and I can start talking specifics.

***Spoilers ahead for seasons 1-3 of The Leftovers***

My favorite episodes are most definitely the reverend Matt Jamison episodes. You don't have to personally connect to the religious themes of Matt Jamison's spotlights to appreciate how each season Christopher Eccleston gets a chance to showcase his electric ability to pull you in and feel what he feels via those baby blues. It was Matt's first episodes, "Two Boats and a Helicopter," that first got under my skin and woke me up to the special nature of this show. Each of the Matt episodes are seeped in desperation, struggle, emotion, rationalization, and longing. Season after season we see Matt's struggle to believe become more strained, more precarious. Each season he doubles down and each season he loses more ground. He doesn't exactly abandon his faith entirely by the end, but he does essentially punch God in the face and acknowledge he can no longer in good faith tell anyone how they should live their lives. (Is my faith crises showing?) Matt's final line of season 3's "It's a Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt World" is maybe my single favorite moment of the series.

Other favorite episodes are "International Assassin" and "The Most Powerful Man in the World (and His Identical Twin Brother)," a.k.a. both times Kevin goes to the other side. I mean. C'mon. Those episodes are such a trip. I also deeply adore Carrie Coon's Nora Durst spotlight episodes and series arc. Favorite moments elsewhere in the series are the Erika/Nora questionnaire, the season 3 cold open, anytime Evie sings, all the glorious beards in season 3, and Kevin asking the koala for directions. Also I have got to shout out the achingly beautiful Max Richter score and many perfect needle drops in the series, especially "God Only Knows" in season 3. 

The ending. What do I think of the ending? Oh boy. THE ENDING. Honestly, the first time I watched I had no idea how to feel about it. I took that uncertainty as a negative and have been sitting with that general sour emotion since last June when the finale aired. But watching it again this afternoon, and especially watching the back half of season 3 immediately beforehand, I can better appreciate the ambiguity of the ending. The ending of the series is entirely wrapped up in Nora's motivations and emotions. We see her struggle so hard to put to an end to all the lies, tricks, hucksters, and frauds around her throughout the series. I think the key to understanding the finale are two exchanges of dialogue in season 3: one between Nora, Matt, and Laurie at the end of "Certified" and the other between Nora and the shagging nun in "The Book of Nora." 

NORA
Do you remember when we were kids after Mom and Dad died, when everyone at the church wouldn't take
their eyes off us? And they'd take us to the movies and bowling and putt-putt just to keep us busy?

MATT
Of course I do.

NORA
And this one time, they brought us to a baseball game, and I was too young to get the rules. So I...I watched these people
in the other section hitting a beach ball. And the whole stadium was getting into it. And when the ball came over to our seats,
you stood up and you just whacked it. It was the first time I'd seen you smile in forever. But then the ball went into the
aisle and this usher ran down and grabbed it and he picked it up, and he just squeezed the air out of it. And then everyone
started booing. Not just the people in our section, but the whole stadium, booing. He just ruined it for all of them. They just
wanted to hit the ball. Why would he wanna do that job? Why would anyone?

LAURIE
Because if he doesn't that ball is gonna go onto the field and it would be f***ing chaos.

Nora's job investigating fraud was essentially squeezing the air out of the white lies and out-and-out lies alike people peddled to make sense of the Sudden Departure. She couldn't stand the idea that there were people out there making light of or profit of the the thing that had devastated her and hollowed her out emotionally. Many of the lies and frauds we see in the series, like the Guilty Remnant, deserved to be exposed by people like Nora. However, even some of the lighter fibs play out to show how, indeed, chaos reigns when truth is displaced for comfort.

And now for the exchange from "The Book of Nora" between the nun and Nora. This exchange happens when Nora is looking for her flock of white doves she rents out to wedding parties and the like where often people attach notes of loves to the doves to carry out into the world, but the notes are shown to be merely discarded by Nora whenever the doves come back to her farm.

NORA
Those birds are trained to do one thing, just one thing, and that's to come home, so you must've done something different.

NUN
Maybe they're delivering the messages of love.

NORA
It's great that your newlyweds believe that a bird with a range of 50 miles is gonna carry their stupid poetry to Timbuktu,
but don't sell that bull***t to me

NUN
I'm not trying to sell you anything. Maybe it's just a nicer story.

This exchange plays into my read on the actual ending, but it also is useful in other spots like the business with the goat. The goat in the series finale is presented at the wedding reception to be a nice little gesture to commit to living a better, sin-free life. However, we see this seemingly innocent "nicer story" later lead to chaos for the goat and Nora both, resulting in fear, confusion, and pain and requires Nora to get her hands dirty to rescue the goat.

My personal take on the ending is Nora calls for the radiation machine to be shut off at the last moment as she realizes how far she got pulled into the nicer story Drs. Eden and Bekker are telling. Then Nora forces herself into exile, continuing to despise the lies we tell to make life easier or more pleasant. When Kevin shows up offering another nicer story to make things easier for them to reconcile, Nora, once again, gets pulled in, again almost going with the nicer story. But she knows it isn't true and has to reject it just like I believe she did with the Departure machine.

When Kevin shows up at her house the morning after the wedding reception he comes clean to Nora and admits he was trying to give them a chance to sidestep the pain of complete reconciliation and penitence. I believe, as Kevin is monologuing about the justification for the nicer story he was selling, Nora has an epiphany. She remembers the positive aspects of these nicer stories, remembers the pain of watching that usher squeeze the life out of the beach ball, remembers her demanding to know what kind of person would want a job taking away joy like that. How could an act that finally returned a smile to Matt's face be all that bad? She holds in each hand the truth that lies can generate both chaos and comfort and accepts the paradox. I think Nora believes she and Kevin have grown enough that they wouldn't slip into a toxic, co-dependent relationship again and that maybe a smile could return to her face if there was a nicer story that allowed Nora and Kevin to reunite. So Nora invites Kevin inside for tea prepared to tell him the explanation/story she'd spent years constructing and telling herself for moments of fleeting comfort.

That is a lot of disparate dot connecting on my part, I know. But I also think there are elements in the finale episode that support this read. For one, when Nora is telling the story of what happened when she went to the other side we see two flashbacks to her getting into the machine, but once in the story the machine is activated the flashbacks stop, possibly hinting it didn't happen because there is nothing to flash back to. But for me the biggest indicator of my read being possible is if Nora had gone through the cathartic journey she recounts to Kevin why is she living a life in exile with seemingly all the same emotional constipation she had before she stepped into the Departure machine? You could argue her feeling Kevin coming back into her life and finally seeing him as upsetting her enough to explain Nora's curtness in the episode. That still leaves unexplained her continued bezerker button of impatience for hypocrisy—like a nun getting busy with a motorcycle man. I think that if Nora had really truly gone to the other side and back and experienced what she claimed she'd be changed in a way the episode shows us she hasn't.

I think she tells that nicer story to Kevin, and believes it herself, so that they can bounce around a metaphorical beach ball of their relationship again and smile again; it's a lie agreed upon (h/t Deadwood). Chaos in some form will certainly be brought into the world because of this lie. Nora decides she can deal with that because, at long last, the potential for love has returned to her life as symbolized by the last shot of the series showing the white doves finally returning to her farm as the sun rises on a new day.

With the exception of Sudden Departure itself or Kevin's death trips to wherever he goes, The Leftovers takes great care to expose the spectacular to be fraudulent or a misdirect. Examples: Evie showing up Melbourne, the divinity of David Burton, the existence of a song to stop the rain, the specialness of Jarden, Evie's disappearance in Jarden, the Guilty Remnant's answers, and on and on and on. That's what makes the ending so twisted. That are few enough exceptions to the unspectacular norm of The Leftovers world that Nora's final story could be true. But then again the show has trained us to poke holes and be wary of the spectacular meaning Nora's final story could be false. Ugh. I hate it and I love it.

The Leftovers is good and great and we should all watch it together wearing only white clothes and holding up signs that say "YOUR PAIN DOESN'T MATTER."

-Art Vandelay

Dear Nameless,

Asking "How many of you are still active in the church?" would let you get information. Telling a scripture story of when a prophet was joyful when his friends were still believers makes it clear that you will derive a level of emotional appreciation to hear who/how many are still active. You then have to moderate that reading of your question by saying "Don't get me wrong I'll love you no matter what!" What I'm getting at is that there's a simpler, better way to ask this question. Just saying.

Don't kill me,

The Messenger

Dear friend,

Sorry, it’s totally my fault that this is so far over hours. A little while ago I sent an email to the editors to tell them off for letting a question about LGBT issues get posted without a SINGLE LGBT PERSPECTIVE, so they asked me to ask people about this one and I kind of dropped the ball. 

I couldn’t personally attend the panel, but the two big takeaways I heard from the LGBT community that did go were:

1. The panel was amazing progress from where BYU culture was even a few years ago.
2. The panel didn’t create a lot of room to disrupt the “either you stay celibate or you leave” binary the LGB community often feels. To an extent, this is to be expected; it’s hard to ask a Church-affiliated venue to affirm paths that don’t conform perfectly to what the Church has taught. But the fact of the matter is, the Church-approved path is incredibly hard. Realizing that other paths can lead to genuine happiness and not just fake happiness is something a lot of LGBT Mormons cite as a turning point in their mental health; regardless of what they actually chose, having multiple healthy decisions modeled for them took a lot of the pressure and fear of failure off. 

In general I would compare it to the Church’s recent joint conference with the NAACP: a significant first given past history, which should rightly be celebrated both for the fact that it happened and the amount of work people put into making it happen, but with a kind of milquetoast conclusion that didn’t address some important facets of the issue.

-Zedability 

Dear Indeed,

I don't really know what you mean about bagel brands cutting their bagels differently, so I can't address that part of your question, sorry. Feel free to resubmit it with clarifying information.

But as for English muffins, the trick to cutting them is actually using a fork! English muffins were specifically designed to not be cut apart with a knife, because that destroys the texture. Instead, their website (linked to above) recommends that you "poke a hole in three sides of the muffin with a fork and pull apart" with your hands. I thought it was crazy when I first heard about it, but turns out it works.

-Alta

Dear My Name Here,

Someone else beat you to this question here.

-The Editors

Dear Doctor,

Like a basic Mormon white girl, it was the Nauvoo temple, and then the Provo City Center.

And you know what, I'm okay with that.

Provo City Center has personal significance to me, although that significance didn't start until after it'd burned down and I saw the architectural renderings of the new temple for the first time. And besides, it's where Spectre and I got married, so that definitely helps keep it my favorite.

-Tally M.

Lovely Franky,

Fave Temple: My hometown's temple is my favorite, because it has a lot of symbolism of my hometown culture and history woven through the design and artwork.

Least Fave Temple: City Center, because a boy held my hands on the steps back when it was a tabernacle then ghosted me the next week, so my happiest memories with that building are from when it was BURNT TO A CRISP by GOD as punishment to that boy for ghosting me. When the temple was announced I was mad that the building was coming back, phoenix-like, from the ashes.  I felt like God TOOK MY FIERY RETRIBUTION FROM MY SAD, JILTED HANDS.  But it's okay!  Soon after the temple was announced I looked the fella up on Facebook and found he had gone prematurely bald, in an unfashionable manner.  You'd think this would restore City Center in my heart to a cleansed, tabula rasa state but--no. The scars remain. The memory burns bright. And, hey, northwest corner stairs of the once-Tabernacle? I fear and despise you as I fear and despise the great rattlesnake, the horrid cottonmouth, and the formidable brown recluse. 

-Yog

Dear Frank,

Not only does Provo City Center have my favorite architecture, but it's also the temple I live closest to. Also, I think the back story of it burning down and then being rebuilt as a temple is beautiful so that makes it extra special to me. So, Provo City Center is defs my favorite.

Peace,

Tipperary

Dear Franklin Roosevelt,

Well, my favorite used to be the Manti Utah Temple, since that's where my husband and I were married.

Now, however, I'd have to say the Philadelphia Temple is my new favorite. It's absolutely beautiful and unique, not overwhelmingly white or traditional, and it's now the closest temple to my home- a mere one hour drive (as opposed to the three hour drive to either the Washington D.C. Temple or the Manhattan Temple). 

-Sky Bones

Dear F to the DR,

I love love the St. George temple. I've never even been inside, but it's so sparkly white. I feel like it's a brighter white than most temples.

-Olympus

Dear Tally ~

I don't know that I really have a favorite, but if I have to choose, I probably choose Idaho Falls by default. I love the Idaho Falls temple. Probably due to it being "my" temple growing up. It also looks like the stereotypical temple. When kids draw a temple, they draw Idaho Falls. But as I grow up and have been distanced from it for many, many years, it holds more of a fond nostalgia in my heart than a current, active favorite.

I wanted to get married in Jordan River because it was more central to family and looked like Idaho Falls. But the one week we could get married and have all of our family there happened to be the one week it was closed for cleaning that summer. I'm kind of jealous of my brother-in-law who is getting married there this fall.

I got married in Mt. Timpanogos, mostly because Jordan River was closed, and it was pretty and still central. I had no attachment to it. But as fate would have it, I have lived in the Timp temple district for 6.5 years now, and I am rather fond of it now.

I like the way Payson has this awesome combination look of modern temple and early Mormon temple. 

I love the decor of the Provo City Center temple. The dark wood. The floral themes. The stained glass inside. Even the exit signs!

So, um. Yeah, I struggle with favorites.

~ Dragon Lady

Dear Roosevelt,

As a kid I always liked the Mt. Timpanogos temple, but my current favorite would have the be the Payson temple. It's so beautiful, and I love all of the stained glass inside. I may or may not also be biased since I was sealed to Ms. Mitty in the Payson temple.

-Mitty

Dear FR,

I've only been once, but the Copenhagen Denmark temple was wonderful. The woodwork, the staircases, and the way the two-stage rooms felt made it really special.

-Kirito

Dear Franklin,

When I was a Young Woman back in the day, we had a lesson about temples and our leaders asked everyone to name their favorite temple. The leaders got each of us a framed picture of the temple we picked. All of the other girls chose Salt Lake or San Diego, so, wanting to be different, I chose Mount Timpanogos. Guess where I got married years later?

In addition to that significance, I love how the Celestial Room has a floor-to-ceiling window that faces east. It makes for a beautiful scene in the morning as the sun rises.

Last, just before my youngest brother entered the MTC, my entire immediate family was able to go to the temple together. I'll never forget how special it felt to unite in the Celestial Room with my mom, dad, and siblings. Again, this happened in the Mount Timpanogos temple.

--Maven

Franklin,

Redlands temple like for real. That’s my mission temple. The murals aren't so saturated and they use skylights for most of the session rooms. 

I feel like I should say DC because I grew up there and got my endowments there. It's nice. It's huge. But it's old and the carpets are not my idea of appealing. 

Babalugats

Dear Franklin,

My right one, that I'm tapping knowingly, waggling my eyebrows at you, waiting expectantly for you to acknowledge this amazing joke.

- Furious George

Dear Y.C.B.I.A.O.M.,

Allow me to explain. When I began college I was not a great student. This lead to a number of lackluster semesters that did not help my GPA. As I near the end of my undergraduate studies here at BYU, I hope to continue on into the master's program. Unfortunately, the aforementioned GPA situation makes this difficult. In an effort to improve my grades and hopefully get accepted into the master's program, I spent more time studying and doing homework last semester than I ever had previously. On the bright side, my grades were way better, and I found my chosen emphasis in my degree. However, my Board writing suffered because of this. Moral of the story? Pay attention in your generals. They will come back to haunt you. Now that I'm out of classes, I should be more consistent in my Board answers. Hopefully I can be of some help to you great readers out there, and sorry to have disappeared for so long!

-Mitty

Dear reader,

The flaw I immediately see in your question is that it assumes that paper replaces a computer. But I can't very well attend alumni week on a piece of paper, can I? Computers come in discrete units; I need to own the same amount of computer regardless of whether I use it for twenty minutes a week or twenty hours a week. From a plastic-and-metal standpoint, once I've bought my computer, it's best for me to use it for as many things as possible.

The question about energy is a good one, though: is it more energy-efficient to use a computer or a piece of paper for a task that could be done equally well on either medium? I was going to try to do some math (*le gasp*), but thankfully the internet has already done it for me!

Math number one: some random Stanford homework from 2010. It focuses strictly on energy consumption, comparing the cost of producing one sheet of paper to the cost of using a computer to read two pages of text. The conclusion? There's almost no difference in the amount of energy it takes to produce a piece of paper and the amount of energy it takes to read two pages on a desktop computer. Replace that desktop computer with a laptop, though, and you can reduce your energy consumption by 90%.

Yes, you're reading that right. Using a laptop is much, much more energy efficient than using a desktop computer. Why? In a word: batteries. The entire point of having a laptop is that it should be small, portable, and usable where electricity isn't available. That puts a premium on energy efficiency.

How about the difference in costs between online publishing and print publishing? A 2012 blog post tackles that question. While there's an energy footprint associated with server space - data centers use nearly 2% of the total energy consumption in the United States - it turns out that by the authors' math it is still 65 times more energy efficient to publish a scholarly journal online than to publish it in print.

And if you're looking specifically at your carbon footprint? Another blog post from 2009 compares the carbon cost of reading print newspapers to reading them online and finds that it all depends on the amount of time you spend reading. Given the post's assumptions, if you spend 10 minutes reading the newspaper, you're better off doing it online, but if you spend 30 minutes, you're better off getting the print version.

All of this information, of course, is six to nine years old. Six to nine years isn't a lot of time for the paper-producing industry, but it's an incredibly long time for the computer industry. As it turns out, according to a theory known as Koomey's Law, processor efficiency (measured in computations per kilowatt-hour) will double every year and a half until reaching a theoretical maximum efficiency around 2050. The law was proposed in 2011; assuming it's held true so far, processor efficiency has probably increased by about 16 times since the most recent article. Now, that doesn't cover other issues such as the efficiency of the lighting in computer screens, but it does imply that the numbers have shifted substantially in computers' favor over the past half-decade.

This is all resting on a few assumptions, of course. First, I'm assuming that you already have a computer (probably a laptop), and you're not buying a new device just to read or to take notes. Bringing a new device into the picture introduces all of the costs of mining, production, and disposal and substantially changes the efficiency balance. Second, I'm assuming that the added wear and tear on the device from using it to read something is negligible. Basically, I assume that your computer will last X number of years regardless of how much you use it, and you will probably retire it because it is outdated technology and not because it breaks. Change that assumption, and you change the equation. Finally, for each of these comparisons, I'm assuming you read the thing in question only once. If you're going to read something twice, that doubles the energy cost of reading it on a computer but leaves the energy cost of reading it on paper exactly the same. So the more you plan on reading something, the more efficient paper gets.

Overall, though, assuming you're reading or writing something just once or twice and assuming you're using a laptop that you would have owned regardless, computers are probably more energy-efficient than paper.

-yayfulness

Dear Reader,

Hey thanks for checking in!

This has been a very eventful year for me. I worked three terrible jobs last summer but I somehow survived. Then I took my last semester of classes in the fall. During winter semester, I did my student teaching at a nearby junior high. I taught 8th grade U.S. History and 9th grade Geography and it was a blast. I mean, I cried the first three days, but by the end of the experience I knew that I had chosen the right career and I was sad to leave. 

But not that sad, because after I finished student teaching I did two things I thought I would never do: I graduated, and I got married.

Graduating is awesome. It is like the best thing. The only bad thing about it is that it's scary to interview for real person jobs. But at the same time it's like: hey, I can just work now and I don't have to do homework anymore. So that's pretty sweet.

And marriage is awesome because I married Rubik and he is fantastic. We went on a super relaxing honeymoon to Florida where our hotel was right on the beach and we got to spend a whole week with absolutely no stress. Now we are back in Provo where we have spent the last few days moving into our apartment and staring in awe at all of our fancy presents. Side note: can I just say how it is the best thing ever to have our own kitchen? Like, man. We can just make stuff in there and nobody can interrupt us or use our dishes or make some weird foreign food that smells funny or nothing. It's great.

So yeah! That's about it. This summer I'm working at a support program for kids and teens in the foster program who have disabilities.

I am also excited to report that, after a couple months of stressful job hunting (and I mean stressful), I have been offered a full-time teaching position at a wonderful high school in Salt Lake county and I will be teaching there in the fall. 

There have been a lot of changes this year and many of them have been scary or nerve-wracking to some degree, but all-in-all I'm pretty dang happy. 

Love,

Vienna

P.S. Here's a picture:

Dear surprise,

I must be hungry, because my first thought was this special pastry. I've never eaten one, but I want to, and I ponder it surprisingly often.

-Mico

Dear happy birthday,

I couldn't find anything for "p romontory" (and to not break that streak I put a space in there)!

I also couldn't find "craquelure" but that's not a common word by any stretch. So, now there is 1 result for "craquelure."

--Concealocanth

Dear Surprising Difficult,

They're not recent, but Board Question #64836 and Board Question #72701 may also be of interest to you.

-Owlet

Dear Surprisingly Difficult,

It's gotta be the "f word," right? It's definitely the "f word." I looked it up just to be sure and yep it's the "f word."

I guess it depends entirely if you consider swears "normal" words or not, but they are definitely common and average.

-Art Vandelay

Dear Mrs. Cadwallader, then,

Well, I suppose it depends on how you parse terms. How would you define "romantic attraction"? Obviously, when Dorothea falls in love with Casaubon, she's really falling for her ideal fantasy of a scholarly, monastic sort of man whose intellectual pursuits have made him wise and profound. She's dead wrong in her appraisal of him, of course, but does that mean her "romantic attraction" for Casaubon is less forceful or sincere than that she later feels toward Ladislaw? If anything, I think Dorothea's "romantic attraction" to Casaubon is perhaps more intense than her attraction to Will, precisely because of its romantic character. She sentimentalizes him, turning him into something he isn't by the very inventiveness of her imagination. There is no more straightforward embodiment of "romantic attraction" than Dorothea's love for Casaubon - a vague preference that she has nursed into infatuation by romanticizing its object.

I disagree with you that she marries Casaubon out of infatuation. I believe Dorothea's love is as sincere as it can be considering how completely she's misjudged her husband, and I'm inclined to blame him almost entirely for the failure of their marriage: they might have been very happy together, and her love for him may have been justified, if he had let her in on his intellectual life and been more willing to consider her an equal. (Although maybe she would have grown disillusioned with the worthlessness of his work, which she had assumed was enlightening and meaningful when really it was trivial and inane.)

By the time she falls in love with Will, Dorothea's marriage has given her two things she lacked in her initial encounters with Casaubon: it's made her a much keener judge of character and given her a more complete understanding of her own self. And understanding others and knowing oneself are the two crucial ingredients for the wise, enduring love that she cultivates with Will. Because (a) she actually knows him in a way she never knew Casaubon, (b) she now comprehends her own mind, (c) Will is so much better suited for her, and (d) he sincerely loves her back (which isn't really true of Casaubon), the quality of their love is deeper and unstrained. But I'm not sure I would call that "romantic attraction" because I think Dorothea has learned a lot from her first devastating experience with love and marriage; she's much less inclined to romanticize Will into something he's not.

Then again, I read Middlemarch very quickly during an illness when I was pretty much only half conscious. So take my answer for what you will.

Yours, &c.

Heidi Book

Dear George,

I agree with Heidi on the whole. In my opinion, she had a romantic (in the sense of an idealized fantasy) attraction to Casaubon that was crushed by the reality of his old man grossness, his inability and lack of real attempts to connect with her as a person, and his pitiful scholarship (failing to live up to her fantasy). She also is romantically attracted to him simply because he's her first serious suitor and she's flattered to have one.

Her attraction to Will is much more traditional in that there's definitely an element of sexual/physical attraction that's much stronger and never dies. Sure, their love story isn't picture perfect, but that doesn't mean she's not attracted to him personality-wise as well as physically from pretty much the first moment she sees him.

I'm still not really sure what you mean by "how romantic" are Dorothea's attractions really, but I think the book focuses on the practicalities of muddling through life as a couple, which are part of any real, lasting romance. 

I listened to this whole audiobook at my former job and when it finally ended I felt like my favorite coworkers had quit. :(

--Concealocanth

Rita,

I'm just flying by even though this question wasn't asked to me because I just wanted to say that I love this series and long for the day when the third book will be released because the writing is amazing and I know I'll enjoy the prose as much as the story and that's all.

Thanks,

Humble Master

Dear Kvothe, 

Has my enthusiasm for The Kingkiller Chronicles decreased? Has my ardour for the Name of the Wind died!?! DO YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE TALKING TO?!?!?!

I now own five copies of The Name of the Wind so if you need to borrow a copy...

Anyways, I still believe that the third book will come...someday... Sometimes I have hope and sometimes I do not have hope... But to be perfectly honest, I don't care about when the book comes out as long as it is the beautiful book I know that Patrick Rothfuss can write. I can be patient because I love these books and that is what you do when you love something. 

In regards to the movie/TV show/video game, he and Lin are creating, it will probably be the second best thing ever (the first of course being The Name of the Wind). 

Sincerely,
The Soulful Ginger 

Dear Rita,

I'm another person who has pledged my love for NOTW on the Board in the past. And while I do love the series and Pat... I'm worried there won't be a book three. I'm worried that Pat's mental struggles plus his never-ending list of side projects has put book three on an indefinite hiatus. I'm worried because there has been practically no news for seven years. And yes, I worry that there's too much story left for a single book, so even if book three does come, what if it necessitates a book four and another 7+ year wait?

I will feel a bit cheated if Pat never finishes, but I understand that he's a human being. I know I wouldn't want to put out a finished product that was anything less than perfect, so I don't want him to write something just to satisfy the readers if it doesn't fulfill his vision. So I'll wait, and I'll hope, and thankfully there are a lot of other books to read in the meantime.

--Maven

Dear Hoothoot,

The concept of quiet time has saved our sanity on more than one occasion. Ever since Twist stopped napping altogether, we've made sure he has about an hour a day to play quietly in his room by himself. It helps a lot with his mood and gives us a bit of time to ourselves as well. Try it out and see what you think!

-Inverse Insomniac

Dear Owlet,

Do what works for you. There are so many good ways to parent, you just have to figure out what way works best for you and for your child. It's lots of trial and error, but you'll find a good groove (eventually). Oh, and don't spend all day at home if you can help it. Getting out of the house always makes my days go by faster.

I'll leave you with a few of my favorite books to read with toddlers, if you haven't already discovered them: Press Here by Hervé Tullet, Dragons Love Tacos by Adam Rubin, and Beep! Beep! Go to Sleep! by Todd Tarpley.

--Maven

Dear Owlet,

I think I'm the only one chiming in that doesn't have a kid so just take my suggestions with a grain of salt. I cannot stress enough how important it is to have a consistent schedule. Your days will go by so much smoother if there are routines in place so your child will know what to expect. Along the same lines: consistency. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and follow through. 

Here are some of my favorite kid bands. They will make you go only a little crazy. As for books, The Day the Crayons Quit by Drew Daywalt, The Book With No Pictures by B.J. Novak, anything by Mo Willems or David Wiesner, The Adventures of Beekle by Dan Santat, and The Snowman by Raymond Briggs.

-Ms.O'Malley

Owlet,

I have a very challenging daughter. She pushes boundaries, challenges authority, stubbornly refuses to get help when she needs it, and is generally oppositional to me and my wife. In general, independence is a quality that I value in people and hope for in my children, but the degree to which she pushes is actually bad for her and I'm banging my head against the wall most days with her.

What really gets at me though? People who think that 5 seconds of observation plus whatever experience they have qualify them to give unsolicited advice. Everyone seems to know how to fix this and it really irks me. We're doing our best here and we think long and hard about how to treat her, praise her, and discipline her in ways that will teach her proper behavior. When what we've planned doesn't work, we try something else. We ask our trusted friends and family members. We look for advice online and in books. What we don't do, though, is trust random people at church to correctly diagnose and solve problems without our request.

So this is my advice to you:  Do not pretend that you know what you're doing. Do not let any person make you believe that they know what they're doing. Do what seems right and adapt when it turns out (as it inevitably will sometimes) that your decision wasn't right. I really think you can't screw this up as long as you're doing that.

Best,

The Man with a Mustache

Dear Owlet,

I've gotten a lot from How to Talk So Little Kids Will Listen: A Survival Guide to Life with Children Ages 2-7 and my 3yo really responds to some of those tactics. The book Growing Up Brave has given us some good ideas for understanding and assisting with big toddler fears. How to Raise an Adult: Break Free of the Overparenting Trap and Prepare Your Kid for Success has given me confidence and a break from the stress of what it can be like to raise children in Silicon Valley.

These books are also good at emphasizing my other biggest lesson from my limited parenting experience, which is: every kid is different, so try different things, give things a little bit of a chance to work before ditching something and moving to the next thing, and don't worry if every single thing doesn't sound like it will be Your Thing.

P.S. Pray a lot! Listen a lot! Read Celeste Davis' article, How to Pray in a Way God Can Answer, on LDS.org!

The other other biggest lesson is to HIRE PEOPLE when and where you need, as you can, without shame. Babysitters, during the day or in the evening and not just for dates. Mother's helpers to come play with the kids while you sleep or clean or read or literally anything at home. House cleaners, whether it's regular or just the kitchen or once a year or one time ever. If you can afford it, it is sometimes worth sacrificing a fun purchase to buy some sanity. Swaps with other moms are also awesome, but sometimes it's nice not to feel like you owe somebody some return service if you are legit going crazy.

-Olympus

Dear Owlet,

Buy your kid a tape measure key chain. I get them at the hardware store and hand them out like candy to other parents of toddlers, because it's the perfect toy. A compact metal ribbon! How fun! Kids love seeing how far they'll stretch, letting them retract, reading the numbers on them, and measuring odd objects. I keep a full-sized tape measure in my purse, which is also fun (if a bit noisier than the miniature ones) because you can bend them at odd angles and make shapes without them going limp.

-Genuine Article

Dear Tiffany,

If you want it, get it. In my opinion, it’s not worth it, but for some people it would be. 

-Az

Dear My ~

I got one. I wore it for years. Then I stopped and put it in a box to keep it safe. I have no clue where that box is now, though I'm sure if I dug for it I would find it. But I'm also certain it wouldn't fit me.

[shrug] It's fun, but it likely won't be a long-term fun.

~ Dragon Lady

Dear MNH,

A friend of mine was wearing his class ring at work and had the following conversation with an assistant or a secretary or someone:

Her: I like your ring. Is it an antique?

Him: It's my class ring from high school, so...

Her: So, that's a yes?

The joke is that he is old. 

I can't stand wearing jewelry; I don't even wear a wedding ring. At some level I just can't relate to the premise of your question: will it be worth it? Jewelry serves no discernible purpose, so I can't imagine wearing it and being in any situation where it's like, whew, good thing I wore this ring, it makes the $X I spent totally worth it. So no, I don't think a class ring is worth it. 

-Genuine Article

Dear reader,

I don't think I've ever noticed anyone wearing a class ring in public - as I understand it, they used to be a big deal culturally, but most people don't care much anymore. I never really wanted one. I've never regretted not getting one. That said, if it feels important to you, go for it!

-yayfulness

Dear Worker,

You could...apply for jobs...and do them? Perhaps they could relate to your...interests...

I'm not sure we have much to go on here, folks. Leaving this one to better minds than mine.

~Professor Kirke

Dear Worker,

What you are looking for does not exist.

You say that you are looking for experience in "which types of working [you] can stand," but admit that your ambition is "not directed at your career." The tone of your question could appear to some to indicate that you're looking for an easy job that isn't tied to the degree you just got. These jobs exist in droves. You can get full-time, hourly positions at any number of restaurants, retail stores, construction sites, trade professions (plumber, electrician, etc.), or civic service positions (post office, library, town hall, etc.). Surely one of these jobs will be something you "can stand" and make a living and there's no shame in that. Looking for that kind of work is fairly simple. Go find available positions in the town in which you're living and apply for the ones that are tolerable for you.

If you want more than that, you're going to have to change the way you're thinking about work. First of all, work is work. Even in the best jobs that cater to your interests, there are going to be tasks that are some combination of difficult, boring, worthless, or tedious. That's just the way work is. Instead of thinking about your potential experience as needing to be something that you can stand, you have to look at experience as just that: experience. What skills to you want to develop? Which people do you want to work with? What further opportunities would come from your work? Gaining that experience should make palatable the prospect of having to do something you "can't stand."

And then? Do what is necessary. Be willing to put in the time that is required. Your concern about long hours is legitimate in one sense. For example, I don't think it's worth working so much that you have no time to pursue your interests or spend time with people you care about. But it is possible that the tone of your question conveys the attitude that you simply don't want to devote yourself to developing those skills. If that is the way you feel then you either need to look at my first paragraph again more seriously or change that attitude and be willing to put forth more than perfunctory effort into your potential career.

Then again, you said that your ambition is not career-centric at this point. That's fine, but then I don't think you will get the experience you might be seeking. It's really one or the other. You either devote yourself to a set of skills you want to develop and experiences you want to have or you work a job which requires less of you but which offers you nothing more than pay in return. Your call.

-The Man with a Mustache

Dear c,

"Because I want to and I think it will be best for me" is a perfectly acceptable answer to this question. Making a decision about your religious affiliation is a major life moment, and your Facebook page is your own space. If you feel the desire to share your major life moment on your own online space, you absolutely have that right and you absolutely do not need to justify it to anybody.

-yayfulness

Dear Currently ~

My brother-in-law left the church a few years ago. It was hard. Family and close friends knew, but that was it. His wife is still very active, and with a new baby, it was a really hard period in their lives, as they tried to figure it out. About a year ago they "came out" on Instagram. I listened to a podcast the other day in which my sis-in-law was a guest and talked about that time from her perspective. She said that talking to other people who have gone through similar things, who had opened themselves to be vulnerable in public, helped her navigate her new world so much that they decided that they wanted to be there as a resource and support to others. So they became public about their experiences. They have since been featured by some of LDS.org's social media and have become a tremendous support system to so many people.

I would say it's all about your intentions. Why are you posting it? To rile people up? Because you're bitter? Or are you posting because you don't want to live with that important part of your life in secret? Or to help people understand? Why do *you* want to post about it? We can't answer that for you. You're going to have to dig into your own intentions.

~ Dragon Lady

Dear Tank Top,

If you want people to know, you can share. That's a good enough reason, and the same reason anybody posts anything on social media.

When I left the church, one of my mom's biggest concerns was how people whose opinions she values would see me and what they'd think of me. I never posted a long thing explaining that I had left and my reasons for it, but after a few months it became clear to anybody who followed me that I was no longer living an LDS lifestyle. She'd expressed a ton of concern (to put it lightly) when I posted about going to the beach or doing non-church things on Sundays. She told me many times she wished I would stop flaunting my inactivity.

What I realized is that I didn't want to have individual conversations about leaving the church. If all I had to do was show that I was out enjoying a glass of wine, and people would know that I don't go to church anymore, I'd do it. If I refused to show anything non-Mormon, people would still assume I was Mormon, and I wanted people to know I am not Mormon.

There have also been a few times since I left the church that I've gone in for job interviews. Sometimes people coyly ask about my BYU experience. But a few months ago, I was in my fifth round of interviews for a job I wanted so badly it hurt. The man who would have been my boss is gay, and while he never mentioned religion, kept asking questions which made it clear he was trying to suss out if my BYU experience made it uncomfortable to work for a gay man. I pulled my usual interview answer where I say that I'm grateful for my educational experience at BYU, but don't agree with the institution as a whole. He kind of nodded and said "okay." (Legally I'm sure he can't say much more than that, but I didn't get the sense he trusted me.)

I didn't get the job, and I was heartbroken. I mentioned that the BYU line on my resume could have had a major effect on my job prospects, my roommate said something like, "Well you just tweeted about Mormonism a week ago in a way that sounds like you're all in." She was very right; my joke about DI vs. Salvation Army sounded very Mormon. And while I have absolutely no idea if that had anything to do with the decision not to offer me the job, I spent a lot of time wishing I'd tweeted something like "AS A FORMER MORMON..." instead.

I know these are incredibly specific examples that fit me. But I just want to get across the point that there are a ton of reasons why you may want to make it public that you're not affiliated with the Church. Just because you can't name them all doesn't mean they're not valid. And it's social media. The point is to keep people updated with what's going on in your life, whether it's having a baby, getting a job, or leaving the Church. So share what you want to share.

-Ace

Dear shoulders:

An extravagantly priced life coach (a career path I highly recommend to all and sundry) told me that there is no "Bubble," I was constructing an imaginary bubble built from others' expectations.

I'm a 30-year-old woman who had her first drink at the legal age to do so but didn't feel able to order a drink with dinner in front of my very liberal, non-religious, regular-drinking grandparents until this statement. It was freeing. 

I'm baffled by your parents' emotional distance — my father wanted long, earnest conversations about secular humanism and my late mother wanted to have screaming matches until we called a truce — and I think that's something worth exploring with a therapist. I would say the same for any Facebook-level "coming out" post. 

---Portia

Dear you,

From what I understand, there's actually an interesting divide between Asians and first-generation Asian-Americans on the one hand, and later generations of Asian-Americans on the other. The first group tends to view these sorts of incidents as "yay, look, they like us!" The second group sees it as cultural appropriation.*

I have a lot of disorganized thoughts about why this difference may or may not exist, but it's the end of alumni week and I don't have time, so here's the cliff notes version:

Based on what I've heard from members of the second group, it's galling to grow up going to school and having people say your lunch smells weird, or compare you to Mulan or Jackie Chan in mocking ways, or joke about how you must be a bad driver or (if you're a man) not well-endowed, etc. Asian-Americans still experience racism today. So you'v grown up your whole life unable to escape periodically getting made fun of for visibly being your ethnicity and partaking of your culture. And then, the night of prom, a white girl wears something from the culture you got made fun of for and gets told how pretty she is and how "cool" her dress is. That would be really annoying.

There are absolutely questions that remain to be answered about what constitutes cultural appropriation. Those debates are occurring within and between cultural groups. Different cultural groups may have different opinions about what's appropriate. This makes the question complicated to engage in. I don't always get it right. But in my opinion, the answer is not to simply dismiss it or complain about political correctness. In this situation, political correctness is simply putting in effort to be respectful of other people. Of course that's more difficult than just saying, wearing, and doing whatever I want. That doesn't mean it's not worth it.

-Zedability

*This is a very, very, VERY broad generalization.

Dear you,

"DiSaPpOiNtEd bY rAmPaNt PoLiTiCaL cOrReCtNeSs"

That's you. That's what you sound like.

-Cognoscente

Dear II,

I once brushed my teeth with a toothbrush shaped like a ghost. Does that count as a brush with the supernatural?

-Genuine Article

Dear you,

When I was in 11th grade sitting in physics, I turned the page of my notebook to find the next page splattered with a damp, red stain. Being the Sherlock Holmes wannabe that I was, I instantly checked under my notebook, around my desk, everyone around me, my fingers and hands, and even the ceiling to look for any traces of anything red. Nothing. I wasn't bleeding anywhere, my desk was completely dry, no red stuff was oozing from the ceiling, all my friends looked at me perplexed when I asked if they were bleeding or eating anything with jam...the red stuff on my notebook had appeared out of nowhere. Perhaps someone was eating jam across the room and accidentally shot some my direction? Maybe someone had a bloody nose and had sneezed near me? But while I tried to think up the possible explanations for that strange red stain, I couldn't deny that there was no one eating anything in the classroom, let alone jam, and no one had a bloody nose nor had sneezed in the past several minutes.

My hypothesis that it was jam was disproved a few minutes later, when the red stain dried into a brownish stain, proving that I indeed had blood on my notebook. Not just blood, but fresh blood. 

Honestly, it didn't freak me out, just left me incredible confused. Where did the blood come from? Did I have a rare condition where I randomly bled without feeling or being aware of it? If it was a ghost trying to communicate from the other side, what the dickens were they trying to communicate?

I can't say it was a brush with the supernatural, but it was super weird, and I still have no idea where that blood came from.

-guppy of doom

Dear Mort,

Today I was giving my students a Plicker quiz and suddenly “Guest 45” showed up on the student list. Not only did Guest show up, but Guest also answered the question. Without a card! The next question Guest was gone. My room has been haunted by a technology ghost for at least the two years I have been in there, but now I guess my ghost has a name!

-Az

Inverse,

I have tried so fricking hard but nothing compelling has ever happened. I spent the night in my friend's haunted house. We were told that if the bed started shaking or we felt anything grab us to hit the covers with a stick and we would be left in peace. The girl I shared the bed with felt something grab her leg but I slept like a baby. 

However, when we first got there we all sat down in the living room. We were all pretty settled so there wasn't a lot of motion going on in the house. But someone made a little joke about the spirits there and we heard a cup fall off the dish-rack in the kitchen. Like I said, it's really not compelling. But it was right when we mentioned the ghosts and none of us were moving around enough to definitely trigger the fall. 

Also one time there was definitely a permanent stain on my brother's shoe. We couldn't tell what it was but like three or four people saw it, touched it, tried to rub it off. The next time he wore the shoes it was completely gone. Not supernatural but just so so weird. 

Babalugats

Dear Sleeps Well?,

At night my husband and I enjoy taking walks in our local Civil War cemetary. It's supposed to be deeply haunted, but we've only noticed the gate closes on its own at nightfall, even on still nights. If it IS a ghost, it sure is a punctual and polite one.

--Concealocanth

Dear Amirah,

Like ... ever? So, just NOT during June, July or August, right? Those long summer days sound like a tough Ramadan, that's for sure. Anyway: Ta-da! 

I'm not sure what you mean by "for how many years," but assuming this calendar is correct, it looks like Ramadan next year will be mostly not in your window (it does hint into June just a little bit past June 1), and 2020 Ramadan is solidly out of the summer.

-Olympus