Any scammer worth his salt does his homework and already knows the victim's kids' / grandkids' names anyway, so this is kind of pointless.
Best advice is to hang up and try to contact the supposed kidnapped person first.
Not really. It's too much work doing research, those scammers work by infusing a sense of urgency to situation and the ones capable of keeping calm in the face of an emergency are the less gullible.
However, Sharp's strategy may backfire, for a scammer, upon being intercepted by a scam prevention system, may perceive that the person who he is calling as more likely to be vulnerable, and so, worth more effort.
That depends, really, on if it's actually recording and if it's known to be. If it's recording, then it becomes evidence for a criminal case, moving things out of civil court and also making the shell game riskier as that likely courts prosecution under RICO or the local equivalent.
The person may be more likely to be vulnerable, but the risks go up, especially as a larger payoff is likely to also increase the odds of those recordings being checked.
Depends on what you need--if you need that sugar hitting your system quickly, fruit juice is ideal, which is why first aid for somebody who is either hypoglycemic or suspected of being so (since it's hard to tell hypo- from hyperglycemia without a glucose meter & you're actually better off with the latter) is to give them fruit juice.
One of the best rules I've run across is that once somebody says "Foo is not good for you," and is not talking about a definite poison (and sometimes even then, see selenium) to disregard them entirely from that point on.
That only applies when you're dealing with basically an ISO Standard nutrient processing system on a lab-made nutrient slurry--basically, lab mice on lab block.
Basically, gut bacteria are actually a pretty essential part of processing nutrients, and in some cases the actual source of much of them. Certain types of problems basically will leave you incapable of properly processing parts--for example, with my aunt certain kinds of foods are now pretty much processed directly into fats, and the body is quite capable of taking part of those 3000 Calories' worth of warm-blooded flesh and using that to sustain it when the 2000 Calories of the food intake is being mostly stored. (And yes, the capitalization matters: nutrition uses the kilocalorie, actually, and in a confusing fit of non-standard metric renders it Calorie instead. Either way, the amount of error due to rounding introduced into the values is left as an exercise for the reader.)
This can, however, be caused by things like a food intolerance or a metabolic dysfunction, and one of the basic tests to see if the person's obesity is a symptom is to, well, cut the caloric intake while maintaining the same levels of activity and see if weight loss happens. The wide range of things it's a symptom of--from things as amazingly cheap & easy to treat such as thyroid disease to those essential to catch early like cancer--are such that failing to check the cause is like...well...failing to check to see if the computer's problem is that it's not turned on.
A high school drop out who wants to keep your kid out of school since she can do better than those idiotic professional teachers.
Oh well, hopefully she's hot.
Given that I've had teachers in public school who had trouble with things like basic math and got angry if you bothered to wake up to go "Wait what?" at statements like 'Snakes don't have bones' (Actual quote!), I'd not be surprised if a high school drop out could do better...
(No offense to any good teachers here, I ran into quite a few, but...I also know there was a problem for years in my hometown with students realizing that the last two years of high school were pretty much time-wasting if you were reasonably intelligent and opting to drop out, get a GED, and go to college. This was solved...by introducing a program that lets you skip the first two steps--and attend college classes for free.)
I'd suggest checking into the local public schools, too--mine turned out to be pretty lousy when it came to somebody with neurological disabilities and high IQ (apparently the latter was supposed to make you magically perfectly capable and well-behaved), apparently quite bad about dealing with interstudent violence (on the bright side I got really good at peeling the homicidal classmate off of me!), and about the only explanation I have for how some of my teachers tried to manage socialization is that a) they thought I was a transboy (agender actually) and b) they did not learn a damn thing about social psychology ever.
There are definite perks to homeschooling (or, as somebody else mentioned, Montessori)--there's a decent body of evidence suggesting we really need to dump the study-by-the-clock rules and go instead off of as-long-as-material-takes methodology. Personal experience with an offbeat teacher did suggest that worked--especially as the school still insisted we stick around the full time so we ended up just spending a surprising amount of our extra time watching movies...and I'd started out rather behind that year, as that was the grade after I had a teacher with a personal vendetta against me that was bad enough the school violated rules to assure me she was gone.
Where exactly is the evidence of studios failing to continue to fund further films? The cost of films keeps going up, and records are still being broken. I see no evidence of a decline of availability of money in the industry given that ever more money is being poured into the creation of films.
Have a list. Give a time period to narrow things down, but this covers the studios that failed so badly to continue to fund further films that they flat-out disappeared. This list isn't complete for the qualifications you give, however. Some, such as RKO, had valuable enough remains that they continue to exist but no longer fund further films.
I'm very glad to hear of a bicyclist who actually bothers knowing the local laws--I grew up in a town where bikes actually are banned from sidewalks because of local cyclists having developed the lovely habit of running down pedestrians. (Well, at least trying to run down. I had to move very quickly on occasion as a small child because of adults confusing the sidewalk for a bike lane.)
Part of why it has the calming effect--probably on pedestrians as well as motorists--is that it lowers the odds of you intentionally pulling some of the hijinks cyclists will occasionally do on the road, intentionally causing problems with the flow of traffic. I have known too many who make very clear their refusal to grasp that some people really cannot get around by bikes--and some have made religious fundamentalists seem mild when it came to their sanctimonious attitudes towards those who don't use bikes to get around.
Also... I've also had to honk at a few cyclists--typically, I am willing to presume a cyclist didn't mean to suddenly come out of my blind spot, especially when I notice a camera, but still, sometimes they do and I'd like think that they'd want to know...and the same goes sometimes for ones whom I at least had seen coming up beside me but did not see signal before moving in front of me. Which actually raises a question--does a camera make it easier to adjust and improve your cycling habits to be safer? I suspect that some problems are more easily spotted by reviewing the footage later.
Some cats are more trainable than others. My family's last cat was not trainable for anything but when food was about to be given him, but thankfully also not able to get on counters or tables what with having acrophobia. Clicker training is the only kind that might have worked, but that's not particularly useful when you want to train an animal to not do things.
My family had a cat that was...well... As far as anybody could tell, he actively tried to track out litter, having tried all of the tricks mentioned. He's been dead several years, and we've still not cleaned it all up. High sides and a covered box were both no-goes: He took both as personal affronts and objected the way he objected to everything--by refusing to use it. He even contrived to spray urine against the wall, which we dealt with by taping up plastic tarps. He actually let us know he was ready to be put to sleep via cat exhaust everywhere.
Wow, I remember back when I was young and naive and hadn't been taught the rule of thumb that if it came out of a body and didn't come out of yours, it's a hazardous material. Wait, no, I was taught about toxoplasmosis as a small child, so I was never innocent about cat feces.
As a well-educated cat owner, I will spend money on something if it means I never have to come into direct contact with cat feces. At least with a baby, the odds are pretty good that the bacterial burden will be rather close to mine. That said, I'd still suggest washing hands before and after & using gloves if the kid or you are unlucky enough to be sick, and point out that probably the safest choice for dealing with diapers are disposable diapers that can be incinerated and the ashes used to enrich the soil. (And, really, I'd want a baby bidet: just wash the poor baby's ass clean.)
Supplements are basically unregulated, so doing your own research is a must--stick the name of what is in the supplement into PubMed and check over MedlinePlus, as the first is meant to be used by researchers (jargon-heavy but the bleeding edge will be listed there) and the latter is meant to educate the general public. Make sure you go into the advanced search on PubMed and set it to only look at either keywords or the title and abstract, though; that'll keep the results close to what you want.
That said, an annoyingly significant percentage of people do believe that magic pills without side effects exist--many people may not even realize this, with it only showing through their behavior. ("Let's Mix Meds & Booze" is a classic.)
Either infrequent high doses or frequent low doses seem to be relatively safe, as far as I can tell; it's typically the best way to bet, at least. Somebody who is popping the high dose regularly, without having checked with a doctor, does need to see one--and if they're doing it for jet lag, consider one of the alternates such as timed light exposure/avoidance outlined in this article or elsewhere. (I have no idea if they can be used with other sleep disorders, though I would certainly hope somebody's at least checked!)
If that was the case, we wouldn't have Black Supremacists and the various problems within the Gay & Lesbian community with accepting trans, bisexuals, and asexuals, and that's only a few examples I can remember off the top of my head & provide citations for...
I went and poked around medical journal databases. MedlinePlus has little, though it confirms the dosage recommendations, while a bit of work via PubMed located this study which I think may be the correct citation. Its PubMed listing seems to indicate that it's not the sole possibility, though, as do its references.
Presumably it's talking about a BAC, but it's bad practice to not be explicit, even with a dimensionless ratio. After all, this possible dimensionless ratio might be not be based on the ratio of alcohol to blood but blood to alcohol...which poses an entirely different problem.
The important question is and always ought to be, are those whom the redaction laws are meant to protect going to feel safe otherwise? I suspect that the concern is not that a gang member will use a FOIA request to get the video clip, but that a news broadcaster will, will air it, and the gang member will see or hear of it.
The 'magically turn that face into an address' process is something known as 'facial recognition' and 'memory.' You do it every time you recognize somebody and remember where they live and/or frequent.
There's a reason laws against witness tampering and the like exist, you know. It's because people really will do this, and a lot of people believe--rightly or wrongly--that if all the witnesses are gone, the case will fall apart.
Parents do not have the right to neglect their child, nor, through their actions, cause significant harm to their child and/or others. The suggestion that homeschool or private school be options is so the harm to others might be kept to where it's an acceptable risk. Conversely, no vaccine should be required which is not for a disease of childhood which has extensive real world data on its effectiveness. (Any vaccination that can safely wait until 12 or so shouldn't be required, at all.)
That said: my experience with the group you cited is that of the ones who'd care enough to object, it's either due to financial concerns or their poor education, and the latter doesn't justify failure to try to address it.
I don't know, it might be better long-term to have the service life of the battery be Telsa's problem instead of the owners' problem--if I own the battery and must pay them for its replacement, it's in their favor to have it be short, while if I pay to have a battery of a given level of quality then it's probably in their favor to keep any given specific battery be in circulation as long as possible.
Poorly educated single parents on food stamps probably are among those who can least afford to not vaccinate their kids--their children are the most vulnerable to the diseases on the standard vaccination list, among the most likely to suffer complications, and they're certainly not likely to be able to afford the costs involved should their children suffer complications. Spend some money on educating them, and have the vaccines provided cheaply or even for free to qualified individuals via the local board of health.
If you haven't gotten a tetanus shot since 1949, you need to: They're only effective for about 7 years, and you really are best off being vaccinated before you get exposed. They give you a shot when treating you for a wound that might have gotten you tetanus because most people don't keep current on it, and it's one of the ones where a post-exposure can help (some).
Ask nicely and you might be able to get a handy wallet card edition of the record, too.
Some confidence? Would you give yourself a 99% confidence interval, or only a 95%?
95% confidence. It depends on what you're testing, the purpose of the test, and the design of the experiment. For example, in some cases you might go with 90% simply because you're doing a pilot study--think of it as beta testing, or perhaps the alpha testing round. These are typically small and, well, simple, and you may go with a higher alpha simply because you're doing rough measurements to see if it works at all before investing the resources into doing a larger study with a lower alpha.
On the other hand, some large medical experiments may even go for a 99.5% confidence interval, due to both the fact that they can due to having a huge sample population and the importance of being as certain as possible.
100% certainty basically translates as "Numbers were pulled from anus."
[..]. instead after shutting them down one of those at the center of Gamergate pushed for a "game jam" for women with a Patreon account...that went directly into her personal checking account. They are also using the guise of "social justice" which in reality is self enrichment and hypocrisy but at the end of the day, when you strip away the "SJW" and "radical feminism" bullshit? Yep just about money, both the corruption in the press caused by and by certain women trying to use feminism the way Rev Al uses the black community. Sure you have a few in this that are so far left Karl Marx would go "Damn comrade, dial that shit back a bit" but as with so many scandals in the end? yep its about $$$
This kinda is why I just flat-out automatically drift to the other side when 'social justice' and 'radical feminism' start being bandied by one side--I don't disapprove of the goal or anything, it's the failure to self-police and deal with internal corruption that ultimately drove me away. I've been told repeatedly that oh they totally do it, but had to point out that it's absolutely necessary to do it where people can see. If you fail to make sure people know it's done?
Public callouts are essential to protecting against the same sort of thought that produces the 'thin blue line,' where you defend any and all members of your group against what you know are corrupt and may even privately disapprove of entirely.
But this is a problem even with the honest ones: nobody dares tell them what you suggest Karl Marx might do, nobody quite seems to even dare suggest that actually it's getting hard to support either side as they're both coming off as equally bigoted really, and they keep drifting more radical (and less logical) without any apparent awareness that they're in an echo chamber nor that they're basically behaving like a fundamentalist religion that merely happens to be secular--dogma sans theology, with no tolerance whatsoever for even innocent questioning of the dogma.
That's more of a "don't take on more than you can chew" story.
Yes. Yes it is. A lot of people forget just how close he came to winning, never mind the really nasty details like how people in Eastern Europe actually welcomed him because of just how bad the Soviets were*--which, to bring us back on-topic, I should note is an advantage that Microsoft seems to lack.
Really, the question ought to be how much of this is an EEE attempt? It may be that Microsoft has decided that what they're releasing to open source is worth too much to just end entirely and not bringing in enough for them to be worth doing the maintenance themselves. Releasing it to open source lets them shift the costs to the community, while they get the profit.
Don't assume they're a one-trick pony, learning a second trick is bound to happen eventually.
* They also overestimated how much of an improvement the Nazis might be, another factor Microsoft doesn't have in its favor--they're too well known.
Actually, I gave two options: It could either be reused for future new engines, or it was pure pork from the very start.
That said, the Stennis facility is still in use as a test stand, according to a quick check of the internet, with even some civilian rocket engine testing hosted on-site, likely for a fee. In fact, it's got a number of test stands, and at least some are still in use as such, suggesting that part of the reasons against modifying already-built stands could have been that any suitable candidates were either in full use currently or would need to be restored to their previous configuration later because, well, we weren't done with it's current configuration yet. It's also open to the public, which probably makes it quite unsuitable for some types of engine testing...
Not to suggest anything, of course. Maybe it really is going to sit there unused, instead of quietly (for some values of quietly) testing rocket engines.
Adblock by default has the "acceptable ads" feature which is pretty much that. I personally uncheck this box on every customer because they allow Flash ads if they aren't annoying and with flash ads the #1 source of malware it is simply irresponsible to allow them but if you care to support advertisers (which I don't***) then this combined with AB should fulfill that goal.
I handled it by simply not installing Flash--if there's something embedded in Flash that I want, I use VLC or MPC, and I have YouTube set to give me the HTML5 versions.
As far as I can, Flash is as much an infection vector as ads, regardless of if the Flash is an ad or not.
Though, really, what we need is somebody going after an ad company for their ads being used to distribute malware: as I recall, we actually do have laws already on the books which say that deliberately infecting a computer with malware is a crime. Simply holding the ad companies liable--as we may already be legally able to do--might well push the bottom line towards where they will be acceptably paranoid.
I'd not be complaining about the pork of merely finishing the tower: if it was designed in a non-wasteful manner it ought to not matter that the program it was designed for was shut down--it ought to be usable for testing any rocket needing to operate in roughly the same environment. Thus, if it isn't, it was pork regardless, while if is properly designed then we have something to use later which will also hopefully cut down on time (and opportunities for budget cuts to strike) for future programs.
Therefore, either its entire existence is pork, or we simply have a stage (and some expense) removed from future engine design projects...and it's only wasteful if we don't plan to ever need to test such ever again.
So, really, it is either end-to-end pork or infrastructure we hopefully want regardless.
Slashdot Mirror
Any scammer worth his salt does his homework and already knows the victim's kids' / grandkids' names anyway, so this is kind of pointless. Best advice is to hang up and try to contact the supposed kidnapped person first.
Not really. It's too much work doing research, those scammers work by infusing a sense of urgency to situation and the ones capable of keeping calm in the face of an emergency are the less gullible. However, Sharp's strategy may backfire, for a scammer, upon being intercepted by a scam prevention system, may perceive that the person who he is calling as more likely to be vulnerable, and so, worth more effort.
That depends, really, on if it's actually recording and if it's known to be. If it's recording, then it becomes evidence for a criminal case, moving things out of civil court and also making the shell game riskier as that likely courts prosecution under RICO or the local equivalent.
The person may be more likely to be vulnerable, but the risks go up, especially as a larger payoff is likely to also increase the odds of those recordings being checked.
Depends on what you need--if you need that sugar hitting your system quickly, fruit juice is ideal, which is why first aid for somebody who is either hypoglycemic or suspected of being so (since it's hard to tell hypo- from hyperglycemia without a glucose meter & you're actually better off with the latter) is to give them fruit juice.
One of the best rules I've run across is that once somebody says "Foo is not good for you," and is not talking about a definite poison (and sometimes even then, see selenium) to disregard them entirely from that point on.
That only applies when you're dealing with basically an ISO Standard nutrient processing system on a lab-made nutrient slurry--basically, lab mice on lab block.
Basically, gut bacteria are actually a pretty essential part of processing nutrients, and in some cases the actual source of much of them. Certain types of problems basically will leave you incapable of properly processing parts--for example, with my aunt certain kinds of foods are now pretty much processed directly into fats, and the body is quite capable of taking part of those 3000 Calories' worth of warm-blooded flesh and using that to sustain it when the 2000 Calories of the food intake is being mostly stored. (And yes, the capitalization matters: nutrition uses the kilocalorie, actually, and in a confusing fit of non-standard metric renders it Calorie instead. Either way, the amount of error due to rounding introduced into the values is left as an exercise for the reader.)
This can, however, be caused by things like a food intolerance or a metabolic dysfunction, and one of the basic tests to see if the person's obesity is a symptom is to, well, cut the caloric intake while maintaining the same levels of activity and see if weight loss happens. The wide range of things it's a symptom of--from things as amazingly cheap & easy to treat such as thyroid disease to those essential to catch early like cancer--are such that failing to check the cause is like...well...failing to check to see if the computer's problem is that it's not turned on.
A high school drop out who wants to keep your kid out of school since she can do better than those idiotic professional teachers.
Oh well, hopefully she's hot.
Given that I've had teachers in public school who had trouble with things like basic math and got angry if you bothered to wake up to go "Wait what?" at statements like 'Snakes don't have bones' (Actual quote!), I'd not be surprised if a high school drop out could do better...
(No offense to any good teachers here, I ran into quite a few, but...I also know there was a problem for years in my hometown with students realizing that the last two years of high school were pretty much time-wasting if you were reasonably intelligent and opting to drop out, get a GED, and go to college. This was solved...by introducing a program that lets you skip the first two steps--and attend college classes for free.)
I'd suggest checking into the local public schools, too--mine turned out to be pretty lousy when it came to somebody with neurological disabilities and high IQ (apparently the latter was supposed to make you magically perfectly capable and well-behaved), apparently quite bad about dealing with interstudent violence (on the bright side I got really good at peeling the homicidal classmate off of me!), and about the only explanation I have for how some of my teachers tried to manage socialization is that a) they thought I was a transboy (agender actually) and b) they did not learn a damn thing about social psychology ever.
There are definite perks to homeschooling (or, as somebody else mentioned, Montessori)--there's a decent body of evidence suggesting we really need to dump the study-by-the-clock rules and go instead off of as-long-as-material-takes methodology. Personal experience with an offbeat teacher did suggest that worked--especially as the school still insisted we stick around the full time so we ended up just spending a surprising amount of our extra time watching movies...and I'd started out rather behind that year, as that was the grade after I had a teacher with a personal vendetta against me that was bad enough the school violated rules to assure me she was gone.
Where exactly is the evidence of studios failing to continue to fund further films? The cost of films keeps going up, and records are still being broken. I see no evidence of a decline of availability of money in the industry given that ever more money is being poured into the creation of films.
Have a list. Give a time period to narrow things down, but this covers the studios that failed so badly to continue to fund further films that they flat-out disappeared. This list isn't complete for the qualifications you give, however. Some, such as RKO, had valuable enough remains that they continue to exist but no longer fund further films.
I'm very glad to hear of a bicyclist who actually bothers knowing the local laws--I grew up in a town where bikes actually are banned from sidewalks because of local cyclists having developed the lovely habit of running down pedestrians. (Well, at least trying to run down. I had to move very quickly on occasion as a small child because of adults confusing the sidewalk for a bike lane.)
Part of why it has the calming effect--probably on pedestrians as well as motorists--is that it lowers the odds of you intentionally pulling some of the hijinks cyclists will occasionally do on the road, intentionally causing problems with the flow of traffic. I have known too many who make very clear their refusal to grasp that some people really cannot get around by bikes--and some have made religious fundamentalists seem mild when it came to their sanctimonious attitudes towards those who don't use bikes to get around.
Also... I've also had to honk at a few cyclists--typically, I am willing to presume a cyclist didn't mean to suddenly come out of my blind spot, especially when I notice a camera, but still, sometimes they do and I'd like think that they'd want to know...and the same goes sometimes for ones whom I at least had seen coming up beside me but did not see signal before moving in front of me. Which actually raises a question--does a camera make it easier to adjust and improve your cycling habits to be safer? I suspect that some problems are more easily spotted by reviewing the footage later.
Some cats are more trainable than others. My family's last cat was not trainable for anything but when food was about to be given him, but thankfully also not able to get on counters or tables what with having acrophobia. Clicker training is the only kind that might have worked, but that's not particularly useful when you want to train an animal to not do things.
My family had a cat that was...well... As far as anybody could tell, he actively tried to track out litter, having tried all of the tricks mentioned. He's been dead several years, and we've still not cleaned it all up. High sides and a covered box were both no-goes: He took both as personal affronts and objected the way he objected to everything--by refusing to use it. He even contrived to spray urine against the wall, which we dealt with by taping up plastic tarps. He actually let us know he was ready to be put to sleep via cat exhaust everywhere.
Wow, I remember back when I was young and naive and hadn't been taught the rule of thumb that if it came out of a body and didn't come out of yours, it's a hazardous material. Wait, no, I was taught about toxoplasmosis as a small child, so I was never innocent about cat feces.
As a well-educated cat owner, I will spend money on something if it means I never have to come into direct contact with cat feces. At least with a baby, the odds are pretty good that the bacterial burden will be rather close to mine. That said, I'd still suggest washing hands before and after & using gloves if the kid or you are unlucky enough to be sick, and point out that probably the safest choice for dealing with diapers are disposable diapers that can be incinerated and the ashes used to enrich the soil. (And, really, I'd want a baby bidet: just wash the poor baby's ass clean.)
Supplements are basically unregulated, so doing your own research is a must--stick the name of what is in the supplement into PubMed and check over MedlinePlus, as the first is meant to be used by researchers (jargon-heavy but the bleeding edge will be listed there) and the latter is meant to educate the general public. Make sure you go into the advanced search on PubMed and set it to only look at either keywords or the title and abstract, though; that'll keep the results close to what you want.
That said, an annoyingly significant percentage of people do believe that magic pills without side effects exist--many people may not even realize this, with it only showing through their behavior. ("Let's Mix Meds & Booze" is a classic.)
Either infrequent high doses or frequent low doses seem to be relatively safe, as far as I can tell; it's typically the best way to bet, at least. Somebody who is popping the high dose regularly, without having checked with a doctor, does need to see one--and if they're doing it for jet lag, consider one of the alternates such as timed light exposure/avoidance outlined in this article or elsewhere. (I have no idea if they can be used with other sleep disorders, though I would certainly hope somebody's at least checked!)
If that was the case, we wouldn't have Black Supremacists and the various problems within the Gay & Lesbian community with accepting trans, bisexuals, and asexuals, and that's only a few examples I can remember off the top of my head & provide citations for...
I went and poked around medical journal databases. MedlinePlus has little, though it confirms the dosage recommendations, while a bit of work via PubMed located this study which I think may be the correct citation. Its PubMed listing seems to indicate that it's not the sole possibility, though, as do its references.
Presumably it's talking about a BAC, but it's bad practice to not be explicit, even with a dimensionless ratio. After all, this possible dimensionless ratio might be not be based on the ratio of alcohol to blood but blood to alcohol...which poses an entirely different problem.
The important question is and always ought to be, are those whom the redaction laws are meant to protect going to feel safe otherwise? I suspect that the concern is not that a gang member will use a FOIA request to get the video clip, but that a news broadcaster will, will air it, and the gang member will see or hear of it.
The 'magically turn that face into an address' process is something known as 'facial recognition' and 'memory.' You do it every time you recognize somebody and remember where they live and/or frequent.
There's a reason laws against witness tampering and the like exist, you know. It's because people really will do this, and a lot of people believe--rightly or wrongly--that if all the witnesses are gone, the case will fall apart.
Parents do not have the right to neglect their child, nor, through their actions, cause significant harm to their child and/or others. The suggestion that homeschool or private school be options is so the harm to others might be kept to where it's an acceptable risk. Conversely, no vaccine should be required which is not for a disease of childhood which has extensive real world data on its effectiveness. (Any vaccination that can safely wait until 12 or so shouldn't be required, at all.)
That said: my experience with the group you cited is that of the ones who'd care enough to object, it's either due to financial concerns or their poor education, and the latter doesn't justify failure to try to address it.
I don't know, it might be better long-term to have the service life of the battery be Telsa's problem instead of the owners' problem--if I own the battery and must pay them for its replacement, it's in their favor to have it be short, while if I pay to have a battery of a given level of quality then it's probably in their favor to keep any given specific battery be in circulation as long as possible.
Poorly educated single parents on food stamps probably are among those who can least afford to not vaccinate their kids--their children are the most vulnerable to the diseases on the standard vaccination list, among the most likely to suffer complications, and they're certainly not likely to be able to afford the costs involved should their children suffer complications. Spend some money on educating them, and have the vaccines provided cheaply or even for free to qualified individuals via the local board of health.
If you haven't gotten a tetanus shot since 1949, you need to: They're only effective for about 7 years, and you really are best off being vaccinated before you get exposed. They give you a shot when treating you for a wound that might have gotten you tetanus because most people don't keep current on it, and it's one of the ones where a post-exposure can help (some).
Ask nicely and you might be able to get a handy wallet card edition of the record, too.
Some confidence? Would you give yourself a 99% confidence interval, or only a 95%?
95% confidence. It depends on what you're testing, the purpose of the test, and the design of the experiment. For example, in some cases you might go with 90% simply because you're doing a pilot study--think of it as beta testing, or perhaps the alpha testing round. These are typically small and, well, simple, and you may go with a higher alpha simply because you're doing rough measurements to see if it works at all before investing the resources into doing a larger study with a lower alpha.
On the other hand, some large medical experiments may even go for a 99.5% confidence interval, due to both the fact that they can due to having a huge sample population and the importance of being as certain as possible.
100% certainty basically translates as "Numbers were pulled from anus."
[..]. instead after shutting them down one of those at the center of Gamergate pushed for a "game jam" for women with a Patreon account...that went directly into her personal checking account. They are also using the guise of "social justice" which in reality is self enrichment and hypocrisy but at the end of the day, when you strip away the "SJW" and "radical feminism" bullshit? Yep just about money, both the corruption in the press caused by and by certain women trying to use feminism the way Rev Al uses the black community. Sure you have a few in this that are so far left Karl Marx would go "Damn comrade, dial that shit back a bit" but as with so many scandals in the end? yep its about $$$
This kinda is why I just flat-out automatically drift to the other side when 'social justice' and 'radical feminism' start being bandied by one side--I don't disapprove of the goal or anything, it's the failure to self-police and deal with internal corruption that ultimately drove me away. I've been told repeatedly that oh they totally do it, but had to point out that it's absolutely necessary to do it where people can see. If you fail to make sure people know it's done?
Public callouts are essential to protecting against the same sort of thought that produces the 'thin blue line,' where you defend any and all members of your group against what you know are corrupt and may even privately disapprove of entirely.
But this is a problem even with the honest ones: nobody dares tell them what you suggest Karl Marx might do, nobody quite seems to even dare suggest that actually it's getting hard to support either side as they're both coming off as equally bigoted really, and they keep drifting more radical (and less logical) without any apparent awareness that they're in an echo chamber nor that they're basically behaving like a fundamentalist religion that merely happens to be secular--dogma sans theology, with no tolerance whatsoever for even innocent questioning of the dogma.
That's more of a "don't take on more than you can chew" story.
Yes. Yes it is. A lot of people forget just how close he came to winning, never mind the really nasty details like how people in Eastern Europe actually welcomed him because of just how bad the Soviets were*--which, to bring us back on-topic, I should note is an advantage that Microsoft seems to lack.
Really, the question ought to be how much of this is an EEE attempt? It may be that Microsoft has decided that what they're releasing to open source is worth too much to just end entirely and not bringing in enough for them to be worth doing the maintenance themselves. Releasing it to open source lets them shift the costs to the community, while they get the profit.
Don't assume they're a one-trick pony, learning a second trick is bound to happen eventually.
* They also overestimated how much of an improvement the Nazis might be, another factor Microsoft doesn't have in its favor--they're too well known.
Actually, I gave two options: It could either be reused for future new engines, or it was pure pork from the very start.
That said, the Stennis facility is still in use as a test stand, according to a quick check of the internet, with even some civilian rocket engine testing hosted on-site, likely for a fee. In fact, it's got a number of test stands, and at least some are still in use as such, suggesting that part of the reasons against modifying already-built stands could have been that any suitable candidates were either in full use currently or would need to be restored to their previous configuration later because, well, we weren't done with it's current configuration yet. It's also open to the public, which probably makes it quite unsuitable for some types of engine testing...
Not to suggest anything, of course. Maybe it really is going to sit there unused, instead of quietly (for some values of quietly) testing rocket engines.
Adblock by default has the "acceptable ads" feature which is pretty much that. I personally uncheck this box on every customer because they allow Flash ads if they aren't annoying and with flash ads the #1 source of malware it is simply irresponsible to allow them but if you care to support advertisers (which I don't***) then this combined with AB should fulfill that goal.
I handled it by simply not installing Flash--if there's something embedded in Flash that I want, I use VLC or MPC, and I have YouTube set to give me the HTML5 versions.
As far as I can, Flash is as much an infection vector as ads, regardless of if the Flash is an ad or not.
Though, really, what we need is somebody going after an ad company for their ads being used to distribute malware: as I recall, we actually do have laws already on the books which say that deliberately infecting a computer with malware is a crime. Simply holding the ad companies liable--as we may already be legally able to do--might well push the bottom line towards where they will be acceptably paranoid.
I'd not be complaining about the pork of merely finishing the tower: if it was designed in a non-wasteful manner it ought to not matter that the program it was designed for was shut down--it ought to be usable for testing any rocket needing to operate in roughly the same environment. Thus, if it isn't, it was pork regardless, while if is properly designed then we have something to use later which will also hopefully cut down on time (and opportunities for budget cuts to strike) for future programs.
Therefore, either its entire existence is pork, or we simply have a stage (and some expense) removed from future engine design projects...and it's only wasteful if we don't plan to ever need to test such ever again.
So, really, it is either end-to-end pork or infrastructure we hopefully want regardless.