Sarin is a comparatively easy compound to produce and deploy on 'neighborhood scale' size. This is why Aum Shinriko used it in Tokyo. They distributed it in plastic bags.
Numerous, totally credible reports at Russia Today reveal that this gas event was an unfortunate consequence of Assad using conventional weapons against an arms depot where the rebels had stockpiled significant quantities of the compound. These reports are definitely not propaganda.
Nor does Assad, or Putin, have any reason to test whether Trump would put more credence in Fox News or Russia Today. (Nobody really expects him to listen government intelligence reports)
Of course Amazon is trying to be Walmart 2.0. Walmart was trying to be K-Mart 2.0, and K-Mart was trying to be Sears 2.0. (do you know, you used to be able to buy houses and cars from Sears?)
Amazon has the massive advantage of not allowing customers into their warehouses, so those customers never have to see the sacrifices of aesthetics to functionality and never have to see the breadth of customer that rock-bottom pricing attracts. Amazon will win because you can sit at home and imagine all of Amazon's customers are just like you: clever consumers looking for convenience and a good deal
Clearly the solution is to go without any boots for four years, save the $40/six months, and then buy the good set. You'll appreciate the good boots all the more for having gone without, and they'll be four years newer than the schlub who bought them straightaway. But you can't do that, because silly, job-killing regulations require footwear on the jobsite.
Excluding that single category, Per capita Federal funding: Metro $8,171, Nonmetro $6,773.
Of course, that's only the spending side. Urban household income is $71k, where rural household income is just $50k (2015). Federal taxes for a family of 4 on $70k is about $5400 and on $50k roughly $2300. So, your average metro denizen "gets" maybe 6x his federal taxes back, where the average non-metro "gets" about 12x.
Obviously, because of the progressive income tax, averages aren't going to add up. The fact is that there are more humans living in cities. Those city dwellers earn more money and pay more taxes than rural residents. Money is going to flow from cities to the country.
What happens to raw milk left out on the counter depends entirely on what microbes are floating around in your air. You and your kids have developed good immunity and tolerance of the microbes you live with; you might find visiting friends' reaction to your week old milk is very different.
But the real point is that individual health choices and public health policy are totally different. Say, for example, that 0.01% of the time, your raw milk gets a noxious infection. Maybe twice in your lifetime, you come down with a bit of stomach distress...might be the milk, might be flu, its just an inconvenience. If 0.01% of national milk carries a noxious infection, then something like 30,000 people will get sick every day. Some of them, because they're already sick, have poor immune systems will die.
I do think it's worth pointing out that these are fairly old course videos - up to 10 years old - and the university is in the process of revising them. One imagines that the new videos will be more ADA compliant, due in part to lawsuits like this. They may not have been super excited about maintaining both legacy and new versions of the content, and happy to have an excuse to do away with the old stuff.
This seems like an excellent argument for a real "IT" professional association or union. No matter how bad you think your working conditions or pay are, you can finds someone willing to tolerate just a little worse.
Also remember that health insurance is just a part of insurance.
Not so much, in the US. Very few real insurance companies do health insurance, and very few health insurance companies offer auto, home, or life. US health insurance, where people expect the insurer to pay for routine care, is not even very much like other forms of insurance, where people only expect to claim exceptional events. Imagine an auto insurance policy that included oil changes and a gasoline discount.
He's not really all that wrong, though. Fundamentally, the problems are that there are more potential employees than there are jobs, but that there are fewer "really good" employees than jobs. Hiring processes are meant to identify the few among the many, but they use shortcuts.
40 years ago, when only 15% of 20-somethings had a college degree, that degree was a pretty good indicator of "ambitious, works hard" which made the degree a good hiring litmus test and enshrined it as a ticket-to-a-job. Today, if a hiring manager has to choose between otherwise identical candidates, they're likely to take the one with a degree over the one without.
Today, when 30% of 20-somethings has a college degree, it has lost a lot of its value as an indicator of "ambitious, works hard," and hiring managers have had to move on to other indicators. Internships. Co-ops. Extracurriculars.
The problem is that as soon as those indicators become known, people start trying to game the metrics. It's like a cargo-cult version of professional development. I can't tell you how many kids I've heard sign up for this-or-that school club just because they believe they have to have some extracurriculars. Not because they have any actual interest in [whatever], or any intention to actually attend meetings and events, but just because they have to have that line on their resume. Conventional wisdom is that these things will help you get a job; student hears these things will get you a job.
Unfortunately, the 4th Amendment only restricts the government. There's nothing restricting your neighbor, a private company, or the employees of a private company from collecting a reward if they happen to notice you doing something illegal.
And stuff like "Show up to work on time, sober and dressed", essential for the professional, shouldn't be taught in classrooms.
And yet, this is a component of almost every professional training program - ask your nurse, physical therapist, or pharmacist whether their program included 'professional presentation.'
Better yet, why not just record one really good teacher and broadcast that to every classroom in the country? Half of teachers are below average, anyway - students shouldn't have to suffer through such poor performance. I mean, why sit through your local theater troupe's production of Streetcar Named Desire when you can watch the awesome movie with Marlon Brando?
Then why not describe the novel techniques you developed to complete the research in the paper? Any process that is claimed to require special abilities is actually one the needs training.
Because no one cares. The funding model for science in the US encourages each lab to find a "niche," an approach or an experimental model unique to that lab, defended by a barrier of custom-fabricated apparatus or years-long technique development. No other lab can afford the loss of productivity associated with that kind of investment, to say nothing of the direct expense.
This is also the reason it's hard to take the reproducibility project very seriously: if you're engaged in a project whose thesis is that many experiments are not reproducible, and you're not getting the same results as a subject paper, what's your interpretation? It could be that the original paper was a statisitical fluke; It could be that you need another six months practicing the technique to get it right.
PewDiePie's being about "it's fine to be an antisemitic little shithead"
I think his point was more that it's trivially easy to make other people act like antisemitic little shitheads. He paid $5, and he got at least two people to make a video that (were it their honest opinion) would rightly earn them wide condemnation. Yet no one's even commenting on those two dudes - they were clearly 'just following orders.' Doing the necessary to pay their bills and probably don't really believe their sign.
His point was that it takes very little to get people to openly proclaim beliefs they don't hold. Especially on the internet. (I assume those two guys would want more than $5 to hold up their sign outside a synagogue, for example.) Ask yourself how much it would cost to get you to add "Hail Satan," "I'm totally gay for DJT," or "People like PewDiePie deserve to die" to your facebook page. Or to film yourself saying those things to strangers in Times Square. You don't have to be serious about the statements, just to use those exact words so that someone else can use them out of context.
This is a very different approach to interpreting the EMG than traditional myoelectric prostheses. They're using targeted muscle reinnervation with multi-electrode arrays to decompose the EMG into individual motor units, then using the more precise motor unit signals to control. ME control couples a preserved, non-involved muscle to control of a single prosthesis motor, where targeted reinnervation gives them access to neural signal intended for the missing muscles. Decomposing a complex EMG into its component motorneurons works well with fine wire electrodes, where the recording volume is fairly small, but surface EMG contains too much information/noise. Using the MEA to decipher that complex signal is pretty clever.
It looks like it only worked well in 7/9 cases, and it's not clear whether they repeated over different days and different electrode placements. It's a proof-of-concept study showing that you can decompose surface EMG into a higher fidelity signal than just patterns of intensity
The time argument against left turns is fairly obvious and was the motivation for the change in policy. The surprising result is that planning longer routes led to a reduction in total miles traveled.
That is clearly not a result of taking a fixed number of routes and making each one longer, but must result from individual routes covering more stops, thus allowing elimination of some routes. In this case, elimination of about 1% of routes - a city that got divided into 100 territories with each driver making left turns can be divided into only 99 territories by avoiding left turns. The saved miles come from that one truck that doesn't have to drive all the way across town to start making deliveries. It wouldn't save mileage if you're a single truck serving a small town, but if you're delivering packages on the scale of UPS or FedEx, those saved seconds actually can be recovered.
So, you're saying that a President is perfectly within his rights to destroy, for example, audio tapes of telephone calls? I know some people who wish that had been true in 1974.
When someone asks a hopelessly naive question in a pubic forum, the easiest thing for everyone is to ignore. The second easiest is to point to a FAQ. In a community of reasonable people, you'd kind of expect that the real experts learn to recognize real problems - like Theo de Raadt not bothering to chime in to your problem until it grew into a conversation - and that less expert people get to feel good answering relatively simple problems. One imagine that they get tired of answering the same questions and mature into the "more expert" tier, but get replaced by new people.
The question is, if someone doesn't have anything useful to contribute, why should they take valuable time out of their day to post an abusive, insulting response? There's no rule that you have to reply to every post.
The real irony here is that we would not be talking about this if Trump hadn't made such a big deal about it and if the entire right wing spin machine hadn't jumped on board to help him. Somebody should acquaint the White House press secretary and his team with the Streisand effect
That's not irony: it's the plan. Give people a big, easily disproven lie so the media can feel good about clearly demonstrating the Bad Things being done by the Evil Man. Ad nauseam. Meanwhile, actual bad things, like reversals of environmental protections, appointment of oligarchs set on disrupting the levers of government, and threats of federal suppression of local government migrate below the fold or back to page 4.
A university should be working at the cutting edge. In the 60s, they were there inventing networking and email, but those are well established technologies now. There's no reason of a university to spend its resources on routine infrastructure when corporate entities can do it cheaper. Look at the prevalence of Microsoft, Google, and Oracle in the daily operations of any major university. If foreign corps can out-compete the domestic corps, why should the government subsidize an uncompetitive business?
Keep in mind that a lot of those Indian workers will have US degrees - US universities have been admitting more and more, partly to make up for declining state support. Many of those students come to the US hoping to turn a student visa into a green card, but most of them end up back home.
I wish every department would do this too. That means he can fire all of them for cause, insubordination, and we tax payers won't have to pay them any severance!
I think you'd have to show where responding to a survey about your past exercise of the right to free assembly is part of their job responsibilities. One might even argue that taking time to answer a bunch of litmus-test questions distracts from the serious business of running the country. In government, just because you're "the boss," doesn't mean you can fire your staff for refusing to wash your car.
"Equilibrium" connotes steady state. Smith's rant argues that an ecosystem can reach a steady state, where the reality is they are oscillatory and often unstable. The reality is that mammalian (and other) species go extinct all the time, even without human influence.
The utopian dream where the apex predator kills off old herbivores just as fast as new ones are born is a mathematician's view of ecosystems, and it's based on the assumption of massless, frictionless, spherical predators.
Slashdot Mirror
Sarin is a comparatively easy compound to produce and deploy on 'neighborhood scale' size. This is why Aum Shinriko used it in Tokyo. They distributed it in plastic bags.
Numerous, totally credible reports at Russia Today reveal that this gas event was an unfortunate consequence of Assad using conventional weapons against an arms depot where the rebels had stockpiled significant quantities of the compound. These reports are definitely not propaganda.
Nor does Assad, or Putin, have any reason to test whether Trump would put more credence in Fox News or Russia Today. (Nobody really expects him to listen government intelligence reports)
Of course Amazon is trying to be Walmart 2.0. Walmart was trying to be K-Mart 2.0, and K-Mart was trying to be Sears 2.0. (do you know, you used to be able to buy houses and cars from Sears?)
Amazon has the massive advantage of not allowing customers into their warehouses, so those customers never have to see the sacrifices of aesthetics to functionality and never have to see the breadth of customer that rock-bottom pricing attracts. Amazon will win because you can sit at home and imagine all of Amazon's customers are just like you: clever consumers looking for convenience and a good deal
Clearly the solution is to go without any boots for four years, save the $40/six months, and then buy the good set. You'll appreciate the good boots all the more for having gone without, and they'll be four years newer than the schlub who bought them straightaway. But you can't do that, because silly, job-killing regulations require footwear on the jobsite.
Excluding that single category, Per capita Federal funding: Metro $8,171, Nonmetro $6,773.
Of course, that's only the spending side. Urban household income is $71k, where rural household income is just $50k (2015). Federal taxes for a family of 4 on $70k is about $5400 and on $50k roughly $2300. So, your average metro denizen "gets" maybe 6x his federal taxes back, where the average non-metro "gets" about 12x.
Obviously, because of the progressive income tax, averages aren't going to add up. The fact is that there are more humans living in cities. Those city dwellers earn more money and pay more taxes than rural residents. Money is going to flow from cities to the country.
What happens to raw milk left out on the counter depends entirely on what microbes are floating around in your air. You and your kids have developed good immunity and tolerance of the microbes you live with; you might find visiting friends' reaction to your week old milk is very different.
But the real point is that individual health choices and public health policy are totally different. Say, for example, that 0.01% of the time, your raw milk gets a noxious infection. Maybe twice in your lifetime, you come down with a bit of stomach distress...might be the milk, might be flu, its just an inconvenience. If 0.01% of national milk carries a noxious infection, then something like 30,000 people will get sick every day. Some of them, because they're already sick, have poor immune systems will die.
I do think it's worth pointing out that these are fairly old course videos - up to 10 years old - and the university is in the process of revising them. One imagines that the new videos will be more ADA compliant, due in part to lawsuits like this. They may not have been super excited about maintaining both legacy and new versions of the content, and happy to have an excuse to do away with the old stuff.
This seems like an excellent argument for a real "IT" professional association or union. No matter how bad you think your working conditions or pay are, you can finds someone willing to tolerate just a little worse.
Also remember that health insurance is just a part of insurance.
Not so much, in the US. Very few real insurance companies do health insurance, and very few health insurance companies offer auto, home, or life. US health insurance, where people expect the insurer to pay for routine care, is not even very much like other forms of insurance, where people only expect to claim exceptional events. Imagine an auto insurance policy that included oil changes and a gasoline discount.
He's not really all that wrong, though. Fundamentally, the problems are that there are more potential employees than there are jobs, but that there are fewer "really good" employees than jobs. Hiring processes are meant to identify the few among the many, but they use shortcuts.
40 years ago, when only 15% of 20-somethings had a college degree, that degree was a pretty good indicator of "ambitious, works hard" which made the degree a good hiring litmus test and enshrined it as a ticket-to-a-job. Today, if a hiring manager has to choose between otherwise identical candidates, they're likely to take the one with a degree over the one without.
Today, when 30% of 20-somethings has a college degree, it has lost a lot of its value as an indicator of "ambitious, works hard," and hiring managers have had to move on to other indicators. Internships. Co-ops. Extracurriculars.
The problem is that as soon as those indicators become known, people start trying to game the metrics. It's like a cargo-cult version of professional development. I can't tell you how many kids I've heard sign up for this-or-that school club just because they believe they have to have some extracurriculars. Not because they have any actual interest in [whatever], or any intention to actually attend meetings and events, but just because they have to have that line on their resume. Conventional wisdom is that these things will help you get a job; student hears these things will get you a job.
Unfortunately, the 4th Amendment only restricts the government. There's nothing restricting your neighbor, a private company, or the employees of a private company from collecting a reward if they happen to notice you doing something illegal.
And stuff like "Show up to work on time, sober and dressed", essential for the professional, shouldn't be taught in classrooms.
And yet, this is a component of almost every professional training program - ask your nurse, physical therapist, or pharmacist whether their program included 'professional presentation.'
Better yet, why not just record one really good teacher and broadcast that to every classroom in the country? Half of teachers are below average, anyway - students shouldn't have to suffer through such poor performance. I mean, why sit through your local theater troupe's production of Streetcar Named Desire when you can watch the awesome movie with Marlon Brando?
Then why not describe the novel techniques you developed to complete the research in the paper? Any process that is claimed to require special abilities is actually one the needs training.
Because no one cares. The funding model for science in the US encourages each lab to find a "niche," an approach or an experimental model unique to that lab, defended by a barrier of custom-fabricated apparatus or years-long technique development. No other lab can afford the loss of productivity associated with that kind of investment, to say nothing of the direct expense.
This is also the reason it's hard to take the reproducibility project very seriously: if you're engaged in a project whose thesis is that many experiments are not reproducible, and you're not getting the same results as a subject paper, what's your interpretation? It could be that the original paper was a statisitical fluke; It could be that you need another six months practicing the technique to get it right.
PewDiePie's being about "it's fine to be an antisemitic little shithead"
I think his point was more that it's trivially easy to make other people act like antisemitic little shitheads. He paid $5, and he got at least two people to make a video that (were it their honest opinion) would rightly earn them wide condemnation. Yet no one's even commenting on those two dudes - they were clearly 'just following orders.' Doing the necessary to pay their bills and probably don't really believe their sign.
His point was that it takes very little to get people to openly proclaim beliefs they don't hold. Especially on the internet. (I assume those two guys would want more than $5 to hold up their sign outside a synagogue, for example.) Ask yourself how much it would cost to get you to add "Hail Satan," "I'm totally gay for DJT," or "People like PewDiePie deserve to die" to your facebook page. Or to film yourself saying those things to strangers in Times Square. You don't have to be serious about the statements, just to use those exact words so that someone else can use them out of context.
Sounds like Howard Stern retooled for the internet.
This is a very different approach to interpreting the EMG than traditional myoelectric prostheses. They're using targeted muscle reinnervation with multi-electrode arrays to decompose the EMG into individual motor units, then using the more precise motor unit signals to control. ME control couples a preserved, non-involved muscle to control of a single prosthesis motor, where targeted reinnervation gives them access to neural signal intended for the missing muscles. Decomposing a complex EMG into its component motorneurons works well with fine wire electrodes, where the recording volume is fairly small, but surface EMG contains too much information/noise. Using the MEA to decipher that complex signal is pretty clever.
It looks like it only worked well in 7/9 cases, and it's not clear whether they repeated over different days and different electrode placements. It's a proof-of-concept study showing that you can decompose surface EMG into a higher fidelity signal than just patterns of intensity
The time argument against left turns is fairly obvious and was the motivation for the change in policy. The surprising result is that planning longer routes led to a reduction in total miles traveled.
That is clearly not a result of taking a fixed number of routes and making each one longer, but must result from individual routes covering more stops, thus allowing elimination of some routes. In this case, elimination of about 1% of routes - a city that got divided into 100 territories with each driver making left turns can be divided into only 99 territories by avoiding left turns. The saved miles come from that one truck that doesn't have to drive all the way across town to start making deliveries. It wouldn't save mileage if you're a single truck serving a small town, but if you're delivering packages on the scale of UPS or FedEx, those saved seconds actually can be recovered.
So, you're saying that a President is perfectly within his rights to destroy, for example, audio tapes of telephone calls? I know some people who wish that had been true in 1974.
When someone asks a hopelessly naive question in a pubic forum, the easiest thing for everyone is to ignore. The second easiest is to point to a FAQ. In a community of reasonable people, you'd kind of expect that the real experts learn to recognize real problems - like Theo de Raadt not bothering to chime in to your problem until it grew into a conversation - and that less expert people get to feel good answering relatively simple problems. One imagine that they get tired of answering the same questions and mature into the "more expert" tier, but get replaced by new people.
The question is, if someone doesn't have anything useful to contribute, why should they take valuable time out of their day to post an abusive, insulting response? There's no rule that you have to reply to every post.
The real irony here is that we would not be talking about this if Trump hadn't made such a big deal about it and if the entire right wing spin machine hadn't jumped on board to help him. Somebody should acquaint the White House press secretary and his team with the Streisand effect
That's not irony: it's the plan. Give people a big, easily disproven lie so the media can feel good about clearly demonstrating the Bad Things being done by the Evil Man. Ad nauseam. Meanwhile, actual bad things, like reversals of environmental protections, appointment of oligarchs set on disrupting the levers of government, and threats of federal suppression of local government migrate below the fold or back to page 4.
This asteroid is "potentially the size of Mars." There are reasons other than cost of fuel not to bring it to Earth.
A university should be working at the cutting edge. In the 60s, they were there inventing networking and email, but those are well established technologies now. There's no reason of a university to spend its resources on routine infrastructure when corporate entities can do it cheaper. Look at the prevalence of Microsoft, Google, and Oracle in the daily operations of any major university. If foreign corps can out-compete the domestic corps, why should the government subsidize an uncompetitive business?
Keep in mind that a lot of those Indian workers will have US degrees - US universities have been admitting more and more, partly to make up for declining state support. Many of those students come to the US hoping to turn a student visa into a green card, but most of them end up back home.
Non-core ventures like TV, self-driving cars, China investments, all serve as death throes to an aging brand.
The iPod and iPhone were once non-core ventures, also at a time when their desktop sales were struggling.
I wish every department would do this too. That means he can fire all of them for cause, insubordination, and we tax payers won't have to pay them any severance!
I think you'd have to show where responding to a survey about your past exercise of the right to free assembly is part of their job responsibilities. One might even argue that taking time to answer a bunch of litmus-test questions distracts from the serious business of running the country. In government, just because you're "the boss," doesn't mean you can fire your staff for refusing to wash your car.
"Equilibrium" connotes steady state. Smith's rant argues that an ecosystem can reach a steady state, where the reality is they are oscillatory and often unstable. The reality is that mammalian (and other) species go extinct all the time, even without human influence.
The utopian dream where the apex predator kills off old herbivores just as fast as new ones are born is a mathematician's view of ecosystems, and it's based on the assumption of massless, frictionless, spherical predators.