First, when working out the plane's takeoff weight on a notepad, the captain forgot to carry the "1," resulting in an erroneous weight of 66,400kg rather than 76,400kg. Second, the co-pilot made a "transposition error" when.... "Transposition error" is an investigatory euphemism for "he accidentally hit 6 on the keyboard rather than 7."
A transposition error would have been swapping the position of two adjacent glyphs, for instance coming up with "64,600".
Typing in a "7" when it should have been a "6" in the number "66,400" is a transcription error. Those are very different errors, typically caused by very different things.
... A lot of people prefer Cygwin's bash, but the licensing on msys is nicer, and all you really lose is some POSIX stuff...
try msys2 ORDERS of magnitude better bundle
From what I can see, msys2 is based on Cygwin, which gives me back the licensing issues I was trying to get away from (and admittedly the POSIX). Entirely defeats the purpose.
Actually, as a Windows user I tend to go out and install the msys version of bash on any system I'm going to be doing serious work on. A lot of people prefer Cygwin's bash, but the licensing on msys is nicer, and all you really lose is some POSIX stuff that isn't all that important unless you are trying to perform a Unix port of something. Most of the official gcc compiler installs for Windows use msys/mingwin.
If you don't mind learning a bunch of stuff that's only valid on today's flavor of Windows, I understand Microsoft's powershell is really nice too. Be warned that some sysadmins restrict access to it though. We've run into issues with that with clients and vendors.
So how do I skew the evidence? I chose my nickname in 1986 when I was young, and I still use it today. Since it hasn't changed at all I wonder how they presume to associate any "age" data with that.
You're right. They'll never be able to guess that the owner of FunkyColdMedina was a teenager back in the '80s, and is thus in roughly his late 40's now.
Again, nope. We pay slightly *above* market rates...
Obviously not. Market rate is BY DEFINTION the rate at which a buyer can acquire a good when they want it. If you can't acquire the type of labor you want at the salary you are offering, then you are, again by definition, not paying the market rate for that type of labor. That's what the term means.
Atword actually thinks that a computer program can fix human behavior.
This is a bit of a caricature, with a grain of truth to it. His general philosophy (at least when he's talking about it) is to design the system your website operates under to encourage good behavior, discourage bad behavior, and be self-correcting by users (who there will be lots more of than administrators).
So while the flaming a-holes will always be among us, they don't get the satisfaction on say a SE site they can get on a dumb message board. Its not "fixing" human behavior, its working with it rather than trying to fight it. Sort of Zen website design.
We are talking economics here. In this respect, labor isn't significantly different than most other widgets. If there's a spike in demand for Oil, first prices spike way up, then people start producing more oil from more marginal sources and the price spike goes down a bit. In the meantime marginal demand sources (eg: the guy who would kind of like to visit Aunt Edna in St. Louis if gas isn't too expensive) will get priced out.
There's no reason labor won't be the same way. I am quite happy where I am. But if you wanna pay me way more for what I can do than what I'm currently getting, you'll be much more likely to see my resume. If my employer wants me just as bad, they will be forced to match that. Eventually one of you will get past what you are willing to pay to have that work done. Big labor price spike. In the meantime, other engineers will see this price spike, relative to what the other things they can do will pay, and will learn to do it to. Hungry smart college students will go into that line of STEM if it pays enough in comparison to medicine and/or law. With the new supply, the spike will go down, but probably not to its original level.
In economics, we draw one diagonal line between cost and amount (of labor) that is roughly proportional and call it the "supply" line. The more you will pay for labor type X, the more people will offer that. Then we draw another diagonal line between those two things that is roughly inversely proportional and call that the "demand" line. The cheaper labor type X is, the more of it employers will be willing to ask for. The point where those two lines meet is the market price.
I think its probably inarguable that the biggest innovation StackOverflow brought to the web was the centrality of reputation and user moderation to its design. Sure, our own/. had done something similar years before, and it was hardly the first either, but no website I know of had before taken it to its logical conclusion in quite the way SO does. This effectively "crowdsourced" a lot of traditional website administrative activities, which turned out to be an incredibly powerful idea. Practically all the functionality of SO is built around the concept.
So when I saw you were tackling online message boards, I expected the same kind of thing. But browsing around a typical Discourse thread, I'm not seeing that at all. Sure, users can "heart" posts, but all that does is bump a small counter next to the heart. There is no way to tell at a glance which posts users found the best and/or worst. Higher rated posts don't sort to the top, or get bigger or anything. As a result, I don't even see that feature used much. Certainly its nothing like SO, where post voting is the central activity. It also seems like moderation on Discourse is designed to be done by administrators, not users. I don't see any facility for users getting moderation privs as they gain reputation. Compared to SO, Discourse seems kind of, well, like a big step backwards in interactivity.
I'm sure I'm missing something here. What is it? Or did you really decide SO's centering of its design around users and their opinion on posts was a mistake, or perhaps just not a good fit for a more generalized discussion board?
Another common reason for closure is the "duplicate" question meme in which nuance is overlooked and questions are marked as duplicates because the people doing the marking failed to understand or appreciate the difference. This is very annoying.
My most aggrevating run-in with this was the day I got an unexplained set of downvotes on a years-old answer, along with a comment (thank you commenter!) expressing confusion as to how it addresses the question. Comparing the two, he was right; my (fairly highly-rated) answer made no sense at all. After a very confusing 30 minutes, I finally figured out that the following had happened in the intervening years:
Months later, the question had been closed as an "exact duplicate" of another question that was only remotely similar (Answer authors are not notified when this happens)
Some later moderator had come along and merged the two "exact duplicate" questions.
Users found the question on the main page (due to the merge popping it up), found all the answers for the old question that made no sense whatsoever for the new question, and proceeded to downvote them
A lot of this could be avoided simply by applying a rule that if answers to a question A make sense for it, but not for another question B, then the two questions by definition are not "exact duplicates". However, people on SO just luuuuve to close questions, given half an excuse. Asking for even this much analysis is way too much for a lot of people, and on a huge stack 5 such people isn't a very large hump to get over.
I'm a software engineer at a large multinational, and we've been trying to find qualified candidates for software positions, but we're having a REALLY hard time. There just aren't any qualified people available. This idea that there are competent, qualified STEM people out there who are being denied jobs by the H1-B program just doesn't seem to jive with reality.
Major economics fail here. Are you trying to tell us that if you doubled or quintupled the salary for those positions, you still would not be able to find people capable of doing them? Good qualified engineers would not happily leave their other jobs for a far better paying one at your company? I'm pretty happy where I am, but for a 5x bump in salary I'd probably be happy to buy a few extra layers of clothing and move up north.
But as somebody who actually studied economics a wee bit, it looks to me like you are saying, "We can't hire anyone for these positions at the price we want to pay them." In normal markets, this is where, well, market forces take over and cost rises up to the point to encourage an increased supply sufficient to cover the demand (at that price). Supply and demand are independent curves, and the market price is the point where the two meet.
What I'm seeing you say here is "We don't want to pay the market price for this labor."
My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain. Now all the archeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs’ graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it. And I don’t think it’d just disappear over the course of time to store that much grain. And when you look at the way that the pyramids are made, with many chambers that are hermetically sealed, they’d have to be that way for various reasons. And various of scientists have said, ‘well, you know there were alien beings that came down and they have special knowledge and that’s how-’ you know, it doesn’t require an alien being when God is with you
Yes, Dr Carson, it's "the scientists" who are saying there were ancient aliens that built the pyramids, you ignoramus.
There goes that old canard about brain surgery requiring intelligence.
That pretty much leaves one other semi-realistic scenario, which is that a repair made a long time ago has failed.
Turns out there was a tail repair to this aircraft years ago:
On 16 November 2001, while operating for Middle East Airlines as F-OHMP, the aircraft suffered a tailstrike landing in Cairo. It was repaired and went back into service with the airline in 2002.
Again, that is very unlikely, because a structural failure of that kind would happen when the plane is under maximum stress - during the take off and climb.
Aloha Airlines 243 had a massive structural failure of the fuselage while at cruising altitude. The cause was put down to metal fatigue. So it has been known to happen.
Don't discount the possibility of an accident. Something very similar happened to China Airlines flight 611...A tail section badly repaired after a minor accident came off in mid-air. The airplane spun out of control and disintegrated before crashing into the ground. That fits this accident very well.
On 16 November 2001, while operating for Middle East Airlines as F-OHMP, the aircraft suffered a tailstrike landing in Cairo. It was repaired and went back into service with the airline in 2002.
Another incident that comes to mind is Aloha Airlines 243, which was also a cruising altitude when a large part of the fuselage suddenly ripped off the plane for no apparent reason. "Metal fatigue" was cited. The only fatality was a flight attendant who happened to be standing in the aisle by the new hole in the plane. So it is certainly not unheard of for there to be fuselage failures at cruising altitude (where the air pressure differential would be greatest) rather than takeoff or landing.
Too bad the data isn't quite meta enough. What would make this really useful would be some kind of smart subject tagging, so photos could be organized by subject without human (or google) intervention.
Back in the 80's for a while I had a database stock photo entry job for a photographer, which roughly boiled down to sorting and database tagging thousands of pictures of egrets. I am now far, far, FAR past my maximum human lifetime exposure to images of egrets. To this day I will swerve my car to try to hit one. If I never have to look at another egret, it will be too soon.
If you think that's a bit scary, consider that there may be some poor data-entry slob out there who had a similar run-in with a photographer obsessed with babies...
Yes, I say he "lost" in the court of public opinion, because the rough gist of his initial argument was that Linux was going nowhere due to its Kernel design, and Linux and Minix had very different trajectories than this argument would have predicted. How much of that was due to kernel design is debatable, but the argument that Linux was "obsolete" 23 years ago certainly looks silly now.
If one digs into the details of the debate, not only were a lot of Tannebaum's detailed points quite correct, but Linus wasn't even arguing against them at the time. He was just arguing that for what he was trying to accomplish, Linux's design was better. So you could say they were both right on the details, but it isn't the details that made the argument famous.
I think we can safely count Germany an exception. Yes, not every western democracy outlaws free association and free speech in this manner, but not every western democracy happens to be the country that started the two bloodiest wars in human history less than a century ago either. Sometimes, if you make it targeted enough, an exception or two might be understandable.
Honestly, I would much rather have seen Lessig on the debate stage with Clinton and Sanders than Chafee and Webb (who have also dropped out now). A lot of folks were legit upset that those two were "wasting my time" taking questions during the last debate. Lessig at least can say interesting things (that aren't humblebrags about killing viet cong). He's essentially been a professional speaker for a couple of decades.
In a way you've gotta admire a guy who will continue to try to wage an argument that he clearly lost 23 years ago (nearly a quarter of a century). That's some serious dedication!
Now he might actually have had a point or two, but still...
As a moderator on a StackExchange stack, I spend an inordinate amount of my free time deleting posts very much like Linus'. Regardless of whether there was a legit point in there, or nothing beyond being insulting, we have a "Be Nice" imperative, and content that can't manage to flop itself over that eensy little bar of civility will get toasted.
All this defense of the insults, well I see more of my free time flashing before my eyes.
instruction or two with appropriate compilers, by using the JC instruction rather than a CMP/JZ and in really performance critical code this will matter, but most code benefits more from readability than that extra instruction.
More to the point, if that single instruction is so all-fired important, fix the dang compiler to recognize that case! Don't uglify the source code.
His reasoning: the compiler could have a bug and this way you would catch that bug.
Back when I was coding for a NASA job, we used to jokingly refer to code like this as a "cosmic ray check". I think there were memory tests purposely doing stuff like that which got carried out at idle. But if you did it yourself, its ridicule time...
mean, I understand because I'm old enough to have a grandfather who was permanently affected by polio. So I grew up with that. But those much younger than me?
My grade school had a teacher/coach who had suffered polio as a child, and thus had one leg significantly smaller than the other. He could walk and run, but his gait was really bizzare. There was just no way you didn't notice.
At the time, hiring anyone with any kind of disability, particularly to teach kids, was highly unusual. However, the kids there were generally from a very wealthy background, and thus would have been prime targets for anti-vax BS. But anytime the word "Polio" comes up, I immediately think of him, and then all the kids that died in iron lungs when I looked the disease up later.
Looking back on it, this was probably one of the best hires they ever made.
Also, Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), and Ted Cruz (R-Canada) did not vote at all, because they are huge
... or it could be because they are out campaigning for POTUS, rather than hanging around DC doing their jobs. Not that they couldn't be ducking to avoid taking a stand on a controversial issue, but I seriously doubt this issue will be seen as a big deal by the average Republican primary voter. Incompetence is usually a much more likely cause than malice.
The actual vote tally [govtrack.us] shows that both Democrats and Republicans voted for the bill (74 for, 21 against, 5 abstain).
If anyone believes that voting for R (or D) is worse than the other side, or how it's the "lessor of two evils", feel free to explain this.
This is true...ish. A majority of both parties voted FOR the bill.
OTOH, Democrats were THREE TIMES MORE LIKELY to vote against it than Republicans. Of the 21 votes against, only 6 were Republicans. So in the binary system we have, if you care about things like this, your best move is to register as a Democrat. That way, you are still free to vote for the better candidate in November (regardless of which party they are in), but you can also push the better candidate(s) in the primary, in the party that is much more likely to have one.
Slashdot Mirror
First, when working out the plane's takeoff weight on a notepad, the captain forgot to carry the "1," resulting in an erroneous weight of 66,400kg rather than 76,400kg. Second, the co-pilot made a "transposition error" when .... "Transposition error" is an investigatory euphemism for "he accidentally hit 6 on the keyboard rather than 7."
A transposition error would have been swapping the position of two adjacent glyphs, for instance coming up with "64,600".
Typing in a "7" when it should have been a "6" in the number "66,400" is a transcription error. Those are very different errors, typically caused by very different things.
... A lot of people prefer Cygwin's bash, but the licensing on msys is nicer, and all you really lose is some POSIX stuff ...
try msys2 ORDERS of magnitude better bundle
From what I can see, msys2 is based on Cygwin, which gives me back the licensing issues I was trying to get away from (and admittedly the POSIX). Entirely defeats the purpose.
Actually, as a Windows user I tend to go out and install the msys version of bash on any system I'm going to be doing serious work on. A lot of people prefer Cygwin's bash, but the licensing on msys is nicer, and all you really lose is some POSIX stuff that isn't all that important unless you are trying to perform a Unix port of something. Most of the official gcc compiler installs for Windows use msys/mingwin.
If you don't mind learning a bunch of stuff that's only valid on today's flavor of Windows, I understand Microsoft's powershell is really nice too. Be warned that some sysadmins restrict access to it though. We've run into issues with that with clients and vendors.
So how do I skew the evidence? I chose my nickname in 1986 when I was young, and I still use it today. Since it hasn't changed at all I wonder how they presume to associate any "age" data with that.
You're right. They'll never be able to guess that the owner of FunkyColdMedina was a teenager back in the '80s, and is thus in roughly his late 40's now.
Again, nope. We pay slightly *above* market rates...
Obviously not. Market rate is BY DEFINTION the rate at which a buyer can acquire a good when they want it. If you can't acquire the type of labor you want at the salary you are offering, then you are, again by definition, not paying the market rate for that type of labor. That's what the term means.
Atword actually thinks that a computer program can fix human behavior.
This is a bit of a caricature, with a grain of truth to it. His general philosophy (at least when he's talking about it) is to design the system your website operates under to encourage good behavior, discourage bad behavior, and be self-correcting by users (who there will be lots more of than administrators).
So while the flaming a-holes will always be among us, they don't get the satisfaction on say a SE site they can get on a dumb message board. Its not "fixing" human behavior, its working with it rather than trying to fight it. Sort of Zen website design.
We are talking economics here. In this respect, labor isn't significantly different than most other widgets. If there's a spike in demand for Oil, first prices spike way up, then people start producing more oil from more marginal sources and the price spike goes down a bit. In the meantime marginal demand sources (eg: the guy who would kind of like to visit Aunt Edna in St. Louis if gas isn't too expensive) will get priced out.
There's no reason labor won't be the same way. I am quite happy where I am. But if you wanna pay me way more for what I can do than what I'm currently getting, you'll be much more likely to see my resume. If my employer wants me just as bad, they will be forced to match that. Eventually one of you will get past what you are willing to pay to have that work done. Big labor price spike. In the meantime, other engineers will see this price spike, relative to what the other things they can do will pay, and will learn to do it to. Hungry smart college students will go into that line of STEM if it pays enough in comparison to medicine and/or law. With the new supply, the spike will go down, but probably not to its original level.
In economics, we draw one diagonal line between cost and amount (of labor) that is roughly proportional and call it the "supply" line. The more you will pay for labor type X, the more people will offer that. Then we draw another diagonal line between those two things that is roughly inversely proportional and call that the "demand" line. The cheaper labor type X is, the more of it employers will be willing to ask for. The point where those two lines meet is the market price.
I think its probably inarguable that the biggest innovation StackOverflow brought to the web was the centrality of reputation and user moderation to its design. Sure, our own /. had done something similar years before, and it was hardly the first either, but no website I know of had before taken it to its logical conclusion in quite the way SO does. This effectively "crowdsourced" a lot of traditional website administrative activities, which turned out to be an incredibly powerful idea. Practically all the functionality of SO is built around the concept.
So when I saw you were tackling online message boards, I expected the same kind of thing. But browsing around a typical Discourse thread, I'm not seeing that at all. Sure, users can "heart" posts, but all that does is bump a small counter next to the heart. There is no way to tell at a glance which posts users found the best and/or worst. Higher rated posts don't sort to the top, or get bigger or anything. As a result, I don't even see that feature used much. Certainly its nothing like SO, where post voting is the central activity. It also seems like moderation on Discourse is designed to be done by administrators, not users. I don't see any facility for users getting moderation privs as they gain reputation. Compared to SO, Discourse seems kind of, well, like a big step backwards in interactivity.
I'm sure I'm missing something here. What is it? Or did you really decide SO's centering of its design around users and their opinion on posts was a mistake, or perhaps just not a good fit for a more generalized discussion board?
Another common reason for closure is the "duplicate" question meme in which nuance is overlooked and questions are marked as duplicates because the people doing the marking failed to understand or appreciate the difference. This is very annoying.
My most aggrevating run-in with this was the day I got an unexplained set of downvotes on a years-old answer, along with a comment (thank you commenter!) expressing confusion as to how it addresses the question. Comparing the two, he was right; my (fairly highly-rated) answer made no sense at all. After a very confusing 30 minutes, I finally figured out that the following had happened in the intervening years:
A lot of this could be avoided simply by applying a rule that if answers to a question A make sense for it, but not for another question B, then the two questions by definition are not "exact duplicates". However, people on SO just luuuuve to close questions, given half an excuse. Asking for even this much analysis is way too much for a lot of people, and on a huge stack 5 such people isn't a very large hump to get over.
I'm a software engineer at a large multinational, and we've been trying to find qualified candidates for software positions, but we're having a REALLY hard time. There just aren't any qualified people available. This idea that there are competent, qualified STEM people out there who are being denied jobs by the H1-B program just doesn't seem to jive with reality.
Major economics fail here. Are you trying to tell us that if you doubled or quintupled the salary for those positions, you still would not be able to find people capable of doing them? Good qualified engineers would not happily leave their other jobs for a far better paying one at your company? I'm pretty happy where I am, but for a 5x bump in salary I'd probably be happy to buy a few extra layers of clothing and move up north.
But as somebody who actually studied economics a wee bit, it looks to me like you are saying, "We can't hire anyone for these positions at the price we want to pay them." In normal markets, this is where, well, market forces take over and cost rises up to the point to encourage an increased supply sufficient to cover the demand (at that price). Supply and demand are independent curves, and the market price is the point where the two meet.
What I'm seeing you say here is "We don't want to pay the market price for this labor."
My own personal theory is that Joseph built the pyramids to store grain. Now all the archeologists think that they were made for the pharaohs’ graves. But, you know, it would have to be something awfully big if you stop and think about it. And I don’t think it’d just disappear over the course of time to store that much grain. And when you look at the way that the pyramids are made, with many chambers that are hermetically sealed, they’d have to be that way for various reasons. And various of scientists have said, ‘well, you know there were alien beings that came down and they have special knowledge and that’s how-’ you know, it doesn’t require an alien being when God is with you
Yes, Dr Carson, it's "the scientists" who are saying there were ancient aliens that built the pyramids, you ignoramus.
There goes that old canard about brain surgery requiring intelligence.
That pretty much leaves one other semi-realistic scenario, which is that a repair made a long time ago has failed.
Turns out there was a tail repair to this aircraft years ago:
On 16 November 2001, while operating for Middle East Airlines as F-OHMP, the aircraft suffered a tailstrike landing in Cairo. It was repaired and went back into service with the airline in 2002.
Again, that is very unlikely, because a structural failure of that kind would happen when the plane is under maximum stress - during the take off and climb.
Aloha Airlines 243 had a massive structural failure of the fuselage while at cruising altitude. The cause was put down to metal fatigue. So it has been known to happen.
Don't discount the possibility of an accident. Something very similar happened to China Airlines flight 611 ...A tail section badly repaired after a minor accident came off in mid-air. The airplane spun out of control and disintegrated before crashing into the ground. That fits this accident very well.
Note the following about this particular plane:
On 16 November 2001, while operating for Middle East Airlines as F-OHMP, the aircraft suffered a tailstrike landing in Cairo. It was repaired and went back into service with the airline in 2002.
Another incident that comes to mind is Aloha Airlines 243, which was also a cruising altitude when a large part of the fuselage suddenly ripped off the plane for no apparent reason. "Metal fatigue" was cited. The only fatality was a flight attendant who happened to be standing in the aisle by the new hole in the plane. So it is certainly not unheard of for there to be fuselage failures at cruising altitude (where the air pressure differential would be greatest) rather than takeoff or landing.
Too bad the data isn't quite meta enough. What would make this really useful would be some kind of smart subject tagging, so photos could be organized by subject without human (or google) intervention.
Back in the 80's for a while I had a database stock photo entry job for a photographer, which roughly boiled down to sorting and database tagging thousands of pictures of egrets. I am now far, far, FAR past my maximum human lifetime exposure to images of egrets. To this day I will swerve my car to try to hit one. If I never have to look at another egret, it will be too soon.
If you think that's a bit scary, consider that there may be some poor data-entry slob out there who had a similar run-in with a photographer obsessed with babies...
Yes, I say he "lost" in the court of public opinion, because the rough gist of his initial argument was that Linux was going nowhere due to its Kernel design, and Linux and Minix had very different trajectories than this argument would have predicted. How much of that was due to kernel design is debatable, but the argument that Linux was "obsolete" 23 years ago certainly looks silly now.
If one digs into the details of the debate, not only were a lot of Tannebaum's detailed points quite correct, but Linus wasn't even arguing against them at the time. He was just arguing that for what he was trying to accomplish, Linux's design was better. So you could say they were both right on the details, but it isn't the details that made the argument famous.
I think we can safely count Germany an exception. Yes, not every western democracy outlaws free association and free speech in this manner, but not every western democracy happens to be the country that started the two bloodiest wars in human history less than a century ago either. Sometimes, if you make it targeted enough, an exception or two might be understandable.
Honestly, I would much rather have seen Lessig on the debate stage with Clinton and Sanders than Chafee and Webb (who have also dropped out now). A lot of folks were legit upset that those two were "wasting my time" taking questions during the last debate. Lessig at least can say interesting things (that aren't humblebrags about killing viet cong). He's essentially been a professional speaker for a couple of decades.
In a way you've gotta admire a guy who will continue to try to wage an argument that he clearly lost 23 years ago (nearly a quarter of a century). That's some serious dedication!
Now he might actually have had a point or two, but still...
As a moderator on a StackExchange stack, I spend an inordinate amount of my free time deleting posts very much like Linus'. Regardless of whether there was a legit point in there, or nothing beyond being insulting, we have a "Be Nice" imperative, and content that can't manage to flop itself over that eensy little bar of civility will get toasted.
All this defense of the insults, well I see more of my free time flashing before my eyes.
instruction or two with appropriate compilers, by using the JC instruction rather than a CMP/JZ and in really performance critical code this will matter, but most code benefits more from readability than that extra instruction.
More to the point, if that single instruction is so all-fired important, fix the dang compiler to recognize that case! Don't uglify the source code.
His reasoning: the compiler could have a bug and this way you would catch that bug.
Back when I was coding for a NASA job, we used to jokingly refer to code like this as a "cosmic ray check". I think there were memory tests purposely doing stuff like that which got carried out at idle. But if you did it yourself, its ridicule time...
mean, I understand because I'm old enough to have a grandfather who was permanently affected by polio. So I grew up with that. But those much younger than me?
My grade school had a teacher/coach who had suffered polio as a child, and thus had one leg significantly smaller than the other. He could walk and run, but his gait was really bizzare. There was just no way you didn't notice.
At the time, hiring anyone with any kind of disability, particularly to teach kids, was highly unusual. However, the kids there were generally from a very wealthy background, and thus would have been prime targets for anti-vax BS. But anytime the word "Polio" comes up, I immediately think of him, and then all the kids that died in iron lungs when I looked the disease up later.
Looking back on it, this was probably one of the best hires they ever made.
in what the officials said was the first attempt in the state to smuggle material into a prison with an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Yes, this was surely the first ever attempt in the state
That depends on if paper airplanes count as UAVs.
Also, Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), and Ted Cruz (R-Canada) did not vote at all, because they are huge
... or it could be because they are out campaigning for POTUS, rather than hanging around DC doing their jobs. Not that they couldn't be ducking to avoid taking a stand on a controversial issue, but I seriously doubt this issue will be seen as a big deal by the average Republican primary voter. Incompetence is usually a much more likely cause than malice.
The actual vote tally [govtrack.us] shows that both Democrats and Republicans voted for the bill (74 for, 21 against, 5 abstain).
If anyone believes that voting for R (or D) is worse than the other side, or how it's the "lessor of two evils", feel free to explain this.
This is true...ish. A majority of both parties voted FOR the bill.
OTOH, Democrats were THREE TIMES MORE LIKELY to vote against it than Republicans. Of the 21 votes against, only 6 were Republicans. So in the binary system we have, if you care about things like this, your best move is to register as a Democrat. That way, you are still free to vote for the better candidate in November (regardless of which party they are in), but you can also push the better candidate(s) in the primary, in the party that is much more likely to have one.