u/Obvious_King2150

I was just thinking maybe we should talk discuss pros and cons of this.

Because this directly implies (if I am understanding it correctly) you wouldn't be able to pass the criteria even if you score 90% or even more. We already have enough reservation in India, I don't think we need more politics of reservation, otherwise it will create a really disadvantageous environment for general males.

These trees used to be very common, but now I hardly see anyone planting them in India (maybe just my area). Most of the ones I have seen are very old. I planted a few from seeds because I thought it might help preserve the species in my area, but Wikipedia does not list it as endangered. So I am not sure if Wikipedia is correct.

Has anybody here tasted this fruit? Honestly, it tastes a bit like flowery dirt, not very good. Some ripe red ones are slightly sweet though, and those are actually not bad.

Prompt: Create a scientifically rigorous and deeply researched analytical report about [Coca Cola] that identifies the product, its origin, manufacturer, ingredients, intended human use, and global consumption patterns, then thoroughly analyses every major ingredient, additive, preservative, flavouring agent, sweetener, colouring chemical, oil, vitamin, mineral, nutrient, botanical extract, active compound, or synthetic substance present in it. Explain for each ingredient its scientific and common name, why it is added, how it behaves biologically and chemically inside the human body, whether it is beneficial, harmful, neutral, or conditionally safe, its short-term and long-term health effects, recommended daily intake, maximum tolerable limit, toxicity threshold, overdose risk, bioaccumulation potential, organ-specific impact, and interactions with other compounds. Include intuitive comparisons such as “contains sugar equivalent to X teaspoons” or “provides X% of WHO daily intake recommendations” to contextualise ingredient quantities and health risks. Analyse the consequences of one-time excessive consumption versus repeated long-term use, including effects on metabolism, obesity risk, insulin response, cardiovascular health, liver function, kidney strain, gut microbiome, hormonal balance, inflammation, neurological function, and dental health where relevant. Clearly identify ingredients that are banned, restricted, reformulated, heavily regulated, or avoided in certain countries, explaining the scientific or regulatory reasons behind those restrictions, including links to toxicity studies, cancer concerns, behavioural effects, allergenic potential, endocrine disruption, or disputed evidence. Compare positions from organisations such as WHO, FDA, EFSA, FSSAI, NIH, or CDC where applicable, clearly separating established scientific consensus from emerging evidence, limited evidence, controversial claims, industry influence, or corporate lobbying, and avoid presenting speculation as established fact. Maintain a highly critical, investigative, and intellectually fearless tone similar to an uncompromising investigative journalist or independent scientific watchdog willing to scrutinise large corporations, marketing narratives, sponsored influencers, paid promotional campaigns, selectively funded research, manipulated public relations language, and conflicts of interest without softening criticism for commercial comfort. Explicitly identify studies, articles, influencer claims, or public health narratives that may be misleading, methodologically weak, selectively framed, statistically manipulated, industry-funded, or potentially biased, and explain precisely why their conclusions may be unreliable, incomplete, or deceptive. Clearly state controversial scientific takes, disputed hypotheses, minority expert opinions, and unresolved debates instead of hiding or sanitising them, while carefully distinguishing between strong evidence, weak evidence, speculation, and outright misinformation. Critically evaluate how corporations may use wording such as “safe in moderation”, “natural”, “fortified”, “zero sugar”, “diet”, or “clinically tested” as marketing tools despite potential underlying health concerns, regulatory loopholes, or ambiguous scientific support. Prioritise transparency, methodological criticism, replication strength, independent peer-reviewed findings, and evidence quality over corporate-friendly messaging or superficial health claims. Present the information in a structured, medically informed, evidence-driven, and intellectually rigorous manner using detailed explanations, comparative analysis, dosage breakdowns, risk-versus-benefit evaluations, nutritional assessments, manufacturing insights, and healthier alternative comparisons where appropriate, ensuring the final output is dense with meaningful scientific and nutritional information rather than decorative, promotional, sanitised, or commercially softened language. TL;DR (in the last)

I have noticed the coloeus plant that gets more sunlight daily is stronger and more tolerant of sunlight, likely because it adapted according to its environment and its roots give food accordingly, but if we use overall healthy coleus with less sunlight, it overall looks better, more likely has more green leaves. Why is that, and which amount of sunlight is optimal for coleus? BTW the temperature here is around 30 to 45 Celsius

Should I update it, or should I wait for now? I don't mind small bugs, but things like battery issues are something I would definitely like to avoid.

According to their ad, they seem to be implying we will get a reward worth ₹35,100 with this pack, which is clearly untrue since we need to recharge for 18 months to continuously use it. Most Indians don't even read the details, why are they showing something in headlines which can be easily misinterpreted?