NOx is also the biggest product of animal agriculture. It also has an effect on climate change. Global warming potential is around 300 times larger than CO2. [1]
I thought candy was delicious CO2 intensive food. Not a complete lifestyle.
Although, food is just one part of the equation. I've never said diet is the only change necessary to make. A person in the first world would do more by not using AC and heating than switching to a different diet, so one might optimize there. Although, not many want to optimize there, so it's easier to change the diet if they wish to lower their footprint.
It might also be hamstrings. For example, while sitting on the chair try lifting one of your legs so you make L shape with your torso (without flexing your lower back).
I can't do that, my leg can't stretch fully. This prevents me from squatting properly.
I've been slowly stretching the hamstrings but I'm still not there. I remember having the same issues when I was a teenager.
So do vegans have a workflow that makes their diet convenient. The thing is, one has to start somewhere, and no one starts anywhere because they see the change as inconvenient.
A good comparison would be FOSS. Richard Stallman inconveniences himself to the point of absurdity, but I'm pretty sure barely anyone does anything close to it.
I changed my diet, I live in good housing, but when I put the numbers on paper, I'm not doing much at all, and could do much more.
In similar ways, majority of people that believe in climate change do nothing (or barely anything) to fight it. No one is reducing their heating/cooling, no one is changing their diet, no one is measuring their heating patterns and trying to optimize it (by no one I mean barely anyone).
People still want their 24/7 AC, their steaks, their huge cars, their big heat inefficient houses, their plane flights etc.
No one does a thing.
Believing in climate change, or not believing, when reflected in the actions of people, is in my eyes completely equivalent.
No one is going to build nuclear reactors in the West for cryptocurrency mining. Just like no one is building nuclear reactors for powering christmas lights or Amazon servers, or Internet servers.
In the grand scheme of things (context being the carbon footprint of humanity) it is insignificant, just like Denmark's carbon footprint is.
Let's optimize the real stuff, not some trivialities (like the Christmas lights in the USA pointed out as a reply).
There's 24/7 AC in USA and China in the masses. There's Brazilian and Argentinian agriculture removing rainforests to grow food for the USA or EU that grows cattle. (EU takes unbelievable amounts of rainforest grain/legumes to feed its livestock, an absolute travesty and hipocrisy)
The footprint of these developments is insanely large, yet somehow coin mining is an issue.
We could then jump to optimize the Internet infrastructure too, despite being 1-2% of CO2 equivalent footprint.
Yes, I understand coin mining seems a bit useless but I'm pretty sure heating and cooling is wasted in magnitudes more amounts, being applied in badly designed buildings, or cooling the streets of Las Vegas.
If you have labeled data (meaning that you know where proper splits need to be made) it's quite easy to build a DP based classifier that minimizes the error over training set.
For example, if you were building a model that spits out 0 for no split, and 1 for split, you can easily make a simple cost sensitive linear model that takes into account previous decisions (something like HMM).
Viterbi algorithm would be the DP step.
For some, to me unknown, reason CNN performs well if not better than DP based HMM.