Isn't 6 minutes the time it needs to reach altitude? Because then multiple parameters change. Adjusting thrust? Flaps? MCAS could take in account multiple parameters/
Oh so the system works much worse(on average!) than other countries who use a less capitalistic system because it is not capitalistic enough! I'm not going to defend my parent post since it lacks all nuance, but I read this https://www.theatlantic.com/ed... and it does point to the capilist mechanisms
The weather models predict that in the north the temperature will rise much faster than world averages, while at the equator it will be slower. So the warming up of Canada is entirely predictable.
Looking at averages also underestimates the seriousness of the problem because it disregards the distribution of income. When average income rises but mainly goes to a small minority, then the majority can actually have a lower income and they are even worse off.
This article has a telling graph of how education has been moving out of reach for a large part of the US population https://www.zerohedge.com/news...
While some technological things have become much cheaper the relative cost of education has increased manifold.
the student loan crisis is then just one aspect of this problem. It's the tip of the iceberg. I still see people focusing on the 'leeches' , people somehow abusing student loans. I'm sure that happens, but using such examples to represent the situation is entirely wrong. As is the solution which is presented in the article on here. The leeches are on the other side. They're the people getting rich off this.
There has been a car analogy where the entry code (in the remote control) for the alarm system was unmodified allowing the default code to disable the alarm on many cars of the same model.
And as the late Richard Feynman once recounted about his time at Los Alamos working on the atomic bomb, 20% of the safes he verified were still on factory settings,
They already know. Some like Papadopoulos and Flynt were really jailed for nothing. Manafort at least committed tax fraud, but he did nothing related to collusion claims.
there is even someone at the wapo willing to say that the whole Mueller enterprise was a massive failure , with press complicitness https://www.washingtonpost.com...? Meanwhile you're still clutching at straws.
The Mueller commission was started to find collusion. There was no collusion. The russian facebook campaign is just a clickbait farm doing what clickbait farms do. The hacking of the DNC and Podesta: maybe. Russia passing mails to wikileaks: nothing more than wild speculation, contradicted by Assange and Craig Murray(who acted as a contact for Wikileaks).
For analysis see Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Mate, who contrary to the mainstream (including the extremely mainstream BeauHD here) were careful and right all the way.
The role of the press in the story: awful. I'd like journalists to get around to criticizing the government for the real damage they're doing. If they want to regain some credibility. There is little left.
You sound very young. I don't know much about antivaxxers but it's a good guess they are similar to with the standard conspiracy theorist. First, they distrust. Second, they are not very smart. The second part makes it easy to dismiss. The first part is the hard part. It is pretty hard to convince someone who doesn't trust you. You say you are a scientist, they say you're working for a big business with its own interests. Chances are you won't even get around to the science part.
It will change many people's minds. It means people will learn that it will become increasingly hard to fund any type of 'unapproved' activism. As trust in the openness of the system disappears you'll find that paranoid theories have only just started.
I have a lot of accounts where I don't know the password because they're generated strings I just copy from the password manager. So I cannot access these accounts from the smartphone even if I want to.
Not all that convenient and not intended. It just sort of happened. Also, what if I'm forced to open my laptop with password manager at the airport. All my passwords are in there!
It's a major fault in/. moderation system that posts are so easily and frequently modded as troll. A comment, however stupid it is, can only be modded as troll if it clearly insincere. This is a comment I actually agree with so you can imagine the misbehavior of the modders is even more offensive .
It is indeed very obvious that with the ending of the Mueller investigation every possible claim against the sitting government will be thrown at it to draw attention away from it.
Well, not every possible claim. Nobody cares about the things where he really stinks. This is a horrible president folks, but the only cases where he had the right instinct were the cases where he got resistance from everyone: North Korea (mostly been torpedoed but not dead yet), Afghanistan(might still succeed), Russia(gave up on that very quickly), Syria(unclear). Venezuela: let's get that oil. So that makes him presidential.
I think you are asking the wrong question. To take another example, the cooking plates at my home are arranged in a square pattern, and the buttons are arranged in a row. I still make mistakes and have to check twice when switching on a plate. It is one thing arguing that each button has a marker and therefore the user has no excuse using the wrong button. It is another thing when one looks at the configuration and predicts that the average time for picking a button and the number of mistakes will be fairly high. The Seattle times explains that even with experienced pilots there are going to be problems while you are still arguing on principle. Reminds me a bit of the famous Sully scene as well where the simulation proves he could still have landed the plane (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1fVL4AQEW8).
I point to the article where they explain the factors which make the interpretation harder and increase the chance of misinterpretation. Quoting it here including the link to a previous article. I'm fine with it if you believe you would never make that mistake. The pilots were experienced.
On the accident flight, the tail movement wasn’t continuous; the pilots were able to counter the nose-down movement multiple times.
In addition, the MCAS altered the control column response to the stabilizer movement. Pulling back on the column normally interrupts any stabilizer nose-down movement, but with MCAS operating that control column function was disabled.
These differences certainly could have confused the Lion Air pilots as to what was going on.
This is bullshit. I am trying to distinguish nicotine from smoking. All the proof of health hazard which I found were done by testing with smoke. That is entirely sensible by itself in a time when nicotine is inhaled as smoke. But it also means there aren't necessarily any serious tests for health effects of nicotine without the smoke . And that was what I was searching for, and you aren't. Search results for damaging effect of nicotine will generally yield the results for smoking.
This doesn't mean nicotine by itself poses no health hazard. Strictly speaking it only means there is a lack of testdata. My deduction was that nicotine by itself is an order of magnitude less dangerous than smoking. Here is an article providing an overview: http://cancerpreventionresearc... .
I did mean 'significantly'. Lots of things have unhealthy effects depending on dosage and we find our way through them. Smoking is the main cause of lung cancer and it plays a large role in heart disease. If nicotine by itself is 20 times less dangerous then that still means something but it doesn't stand out in the crowd anymore and then you have to be really health conscious to start avoiding it (like me I guess). My assumption was that the burning products of tobacco caused lung cancer and the nicotine destroyed the veins. But that was wrong.
I was quite surprised that I couldn't find any proof that nicotine is harmful. The harm in addiction could be little more than economical. I always assumed that a large component of what makes smoking cigarettes directly harmful was the nicotine. Of course if the nicotine keeps you inhaling all the other combustion chemicals then that makes it quite harmful in an indirect manner.
I was even more surprised to find that there is a good argument to say the same about heroin:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/14/drugsandalcohol.socialsciences
That is called sortition and it is a valuable proposal. It is entirely different from referenda in which everyone gets to give their off the cuff answer: you get real representation and they get to dedicate their time to it. It's being discussed regularly, for instance here https://equalitydemocracy.comm...
The question of letting software decide is indeed completely missing the point and is simply a restatement of 'letting the experts run the country'. The value in having someone to represent you is not how smart they are but how representative. Nothing stops the representative for calling in experts to assist them and help them understand what can be done. The weakness of representatives is that they don't represent you.
As I quoted in my other post, this specific problem was difficult to recognize as runaway trim so the fix was counterintuitive. Look for 'runaway' in https://www.seattletimes.com/b...
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't 6 minutes the time it needs to reach altitude? Because then multiple parameters change. Adjusting thrust? Flaps? MCAS could take in account multiple parameters/
Oh so the system works much worse(on average!) than other countries who use a less capitalistic system because it is not capitalistic enough!
I'm not going to defend my parent post since it lacks all nuance, but I read this https://www.theatlantic.com/ed... and it does point to the capilist mechanisms
The weather models predict that in the north the temperature will rise much faster than world averages, while at the equator it will be slower. So the warming up of Canada is entirely predictable.
Looking at averages also underestimates the seriousness of the problem because it disregards the distribution of income.
When average income rises but mainly goes to a small minority, then the majority can actually have a lower income and they are even worse off.
This article has a telling graph of how education has been moving out of reach for a large part of the US population
https://www.zerohedge.com/news...
While some technological things have become much cheaper the relative cost of education has increased manifold.
the student loan crisis is then just one aspect of this problem. It's the tip of the iceberg. I still see people focusing on the 'leeches' , people somehow abusing student loans. I'm sure that happens, but using such examples to represent the situation is entirely wrong. As is the solution which is presented in the article on here. The leeches are on the other side. They're the people getting rich off this.
There has been a car analogy where the entry code (in the remote control) for the alarm system was unmodified allowing the default code to disable the alarm on many cars of the same model.
And as the late Richard Feynman once recounted about his time at Los Alamos working on the atomic bomb, 20% of the safes he verified were still on factory settings,
They already know. Some like Papadopoulos and Flynt were really jailed for nothing. Manafort at least committed tax fraud, but he did nothing related to collusion claims.
there is even someone at the wapo willing to say that the whole Mueller enterprise was a massive failure , with press complicitness
https://www.washingtonpost.com...?
Meanwhile you're still clutching at straws.
The Mueller commission was started to find collusion. There was no collusion.
The russian facebook campaign is just a clickbait farm doing what clickbait farms do.
The hacking of the DNC and Podesta: maybe.
Russia passing mails to wikileaks: nothing more than wild speculation, contradicted by Assange and Craig Murray(who acted as a contact for Wikileaks).
For analysis see Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Mate, who contrary to the mainstream (including the extremely mainstream BeauHD here) were careful and right all the way.
The role of the press in the story: awful.
I'd like journalists to get around to criticizing the government for the real damage they're doing. If they want to regain some credibility. There is little left.
Do you refuse all vaccinations, only some, or do you go along grudgingly while disliking big pharma?
You sound very young. I don't know much about antivaxxers but it's a good guess they are similar to with the standard conspiracy theorist. First, they distrust. Second, they are not very smart. The second part makes it easy to dismiss. The first part is the hard part. It is pretty hard to convince someone who doesn't trust you. You say you are a scientist, they say you're working for a big business with its own interests. Chances are you won't even get around to the science part.
It will change many people's minds. It means people will learn that it will become increasingly hard to fund any type of 'unapproved' activism. As trust in the openness of the system disappears you'll find that paranoid theories have only just started.
I have a lot of accounts where I don't know the password because they're generated strings I just copy from the password manager. So I cannot access these accounts from the smartphone even if I want to.
Not all that convenient and not intended. It just sort of happened. Also, what if I'm forced to open my laptop with password manager at the airport. All my passwords are in there!
It's never about needing the oil. It is about controlling it and a bit about selling it.
It's a major fault in /. moderation system that posts are so easily and frequently modded as troll. A comment, however stupid it is, can only be modded as troll if it clearly insincere.
This is a comment I actually agree with so you can imagine the misbehavior of the modders is even more offensive .
It is indeed very obvious that with the ending of the Mueller investigation every possible claim against the sitting government will be thrown at it to draw attention away from it.
Well, not every possible claim. Nobody cares about the things where he really stinks. This is a horrible president folks, but the only cases where he had the right instinct were the cases where he got resistance from everyone: North Korea (mostly been torpedoed but not dead yet), Afghanistan(might still succeed), Russia(gave up on that very quickly), Syria(unclear). Venezuela: let's get that oil. So that makes him presidential.
Look here instead everyone! Here's the real problem!
I think you are asking the wrong question. To take another example, the cooking plates at my home are arranged in a square pattern, and the buttons are arranged in a row. I still make mistakes and have to check twice when switching on a plate. It is one thing arguing that each button has a marker and therefore the user has no excuse using the wrong button. It is another thing when one looks at the configuration and predicts that the average time for picking a button and the number of mistakes will be fairly high. The Seattle times explains that even with experienced pilots there are going to be problems while you are still arguing on principle.
Reminds me a bit of the famous Sully scene as well where the simulation proves he could still have landed the plane (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1fVL4AQEW8).
I point to the article where they explain the factors which make the interpretation harder and increase the chance of misinterpretation. Quoting it here including the link to a previous article. I'm fine with it if you believe you would never make that mistake. The pilots were experienced.
.
How is this relevant for figuring out the health effects of getting your nicotine fix without inhaling burned tobacco?
This is bullshit. I am trying to distinguish nicotine from smoking. All the proof of health hazard which I found were done by testing with smoke. That is entirely sensible by itself in a time when nicotine is inhaled as smoke. But it also means there aren't necessarily any serious tests for health effects of nicotine without the smoke . And that was what I was searching for, and you aren't. Search results for damaging effect of nicotine will generally yield the results for smoking.
This doesn't mean nicotine by itself poses no health hazard. Strictly speaking it only means there is a lack of testdata. My deduction was that nicotine by itself is an order of magnitude less dangerous than smoking. Here is an article providing an overview:
http://cancerpreventionresearc... .
Show me a result of impact of isolated nicotine which is anywhere near the effect of smoking
I did mean 'significantly'. Lots of things have unhealthy effects depending on dosage and we find our way through them. Smoking is the main cause of lung cancer and it plays a large role in heart disease. If nicotine by itself is 20 times less dangerous then that still means something but it doesn't stand out in the crowd anymore and then you have to be really health conscious to start avoiding it (like me I guess). My assumption was that the burning products of tobacco caused lung cancer and the nicotine destroyed the veins. But that was wrong.
I was quite surprised that I couldn't find any proof that nicotine is harmful. The harm in addiction could be little more than economical. I always assumed that a large component of what makes smoking cigarettes directly harmful was the nicotine.
Of course if the nicotine keeps you inhaling all the other combustion chemicals then that makes it quite harmful in an indirect manner.
I was even more surprised to find that there is a good argument to say the same about heroin :https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/14/drugsandalcohol.socialsciences
That is called sortition and it is a valuable proposal. It is entirely different from referenda in which everyone gets to give their off the cuff answer: you get real representation and they get to dedicate their time to it. It's being discussed regularly, for instance here https://equalitydemocracy.comm...
The question of letting software decide is indeed completely missing the point and is simply a restatement of 'letting the experts run the country'. The value in having someone to represent you is not how smart they are but how representative. Nothing stops the representative for calling in experts to assist them and help them understand what can be done. The weakness of representatives is that they don't represent you.
I think that is a key observation. The plane did not need the CMAS mechanism to make it safe but to avoid the retraining/recertifying.
As I quoted in my other post, this specific problem was difficult to recognize as runaway trim so the fix was counterintuitive. Look for 'runaway' in https://www.seattletimes.com/b...