While I agree that even one shooting is too many... I look at this and feel like the wording makes it sound like a bombing or shooting at a concert takes place very 2-3 days. I doubt very many people think that if they go to a concert that they are likely be part of a mass murder.
Hmm, 2018 mass shootings at concerts....
Nope, there weren't any. Closest was a series of shootings at Mardi Gras. Three dead, in unrelated instances, only a "mass shooting" if you define Mardi Gras as a single event (as opposed to a 24+hour party covering the whole city)....
Somehow, I can't really see "we decided to put off making the decision required to end the impasse until next year" as making progress toward resolving the impasse....
Using that logic, we can truly say that we've resolved the AGW issue in its entirety at this point, and so nothing else needs to be done....
Sure it works its safe. its when it breaks or something goes wrong. You get another Chernobyl
Yeah, it would be terrifying to have a Chernobyl happening every day, wouldn't it? I mean, that would mean that nuclear power would produce almost as many fatalities as New York City traffic does....
Assuming a Chernobyl every day, of course. If we had TWO Chernobyls daily, we'd have almost as many nuclear-related fatalities as New York City AND Los Angeles traffic deaths produce.
Note, by the by, that the New York City traffic deaths produce more fatalities every decade produce more fatalities then nuclear power has in all of history, even if you include Hiroshima and Nagasaki as "nuclear power related deaths".....
It also means that an article written for an American audience, quoting an American scientist (who presumably wants her audience to understand her), uses comparatives understandable to most Americans....
It's quite likely they're better educated than the people who aren't bright enough to divide by three when dealing with small numbers of significant digits (y'know like "100 feet" - no they aren't dealing with a 99.5 - 100.49 foot tsunami, and ignoring the possible 100.7 foot tsunami....)
Back to the topic at hand: Equifax. Organizations which repeatedly violate the trust of the people they are supposed to serve (the general public), who allow incompetent members of their organization to expose the public's information to breach and theft, and who don't seem to care enough to change their ways, must be brought down, broken up, and restructured under the supervision of one or more entities with proven track-records of secure, fair, and trustworthy dealings with the public. Yes, there still are some of those out there.
And how long will such "supervision" with "proven track records of secure, fair, and trustworthy dealing with the public" stay that way when they make money hand over fist by being a little bit less "secure, fair, and trustworthy"?
One of those turboprops it's supposed to replace can be back in the air in an hour. Can this thing be recharged in an hour? Or are we talking buying four or five of these to replace every turboprop? Or 40-50 of these, if they only carry single-digit passengers....
Global stupidity seems a constant factor on this planet. In some social groups denial of reality is most prominent, because reality challenges their believe and there behavior.
Classic example...
"their believe" should be "their beliefs".
"there behavior" should be "their behavior".
The really appalling thing was that you got "their" right once, but managed to lose it within five words. Which tells me you got it right the one time by pure luck, which applies even to "global stupidity"....
It's stated right in the summary that the battery project cost $66M.
True. However, another article on the subject used the number $90.2M. Which might just mean that the one article was in Aussie Dollars and the other in US dollars. Or it might mean that one or the other or neither was correct.
Note also that exactly what was included in the $66M or $90.2M wasn't mentioned. The battery only? The battery plus wiring to link it to grid? All that and the building? All that, the building and the break room for the technicians? All of the above, plus a new SUV for the executive in charge of the project?
Creative accounting has been used for a long time to conceal the true cost of a new project. Don't know whether that was done here, and I doubt you do either (unless you're one of the project engineers, anyways)....
It's a 20 month breakeven IF the Real World (tm) matches the estimate. Do note that while the Title said "saved $40 million", TFS says "they estimate that the battery allows annual savings in the wholesale market approaching $40 million".
Note that word "estimate", it's important. It's the difference between "saved $40M", and "might save $40M". And since the battery was turned on this past Friday, that $40M is NOT a description of what the battery has done, but of what it might do over the next 12 months.
That aside, how much did this battery cost? Less than $385M, I assume since it's part of a plan that cost $385M. If it, and its infrastructure (the building it's in, the wiring, etc) actually cost the $90.2M that another article says it did, then it'll pay for itself in three years or so. And then they'll have the hassle of recycling it. Won't that be fun?
While the bill is fucking retarded. You aren't expected to magically break encryption, you are expected to provide as much technical assistance and information as possible when requested.
And who gets to decide if you've "provided as much technical assistance and information as possible"?
And on what basis will they make the decision?
Hint: it's probably not the hypothetical "you", and they'll decide based on whether you've provided the cleartext they asked for....
Wonder how long it'll be before the Aussie gov has to start blocking large chunks of the internet, to keep people from locating encryption software that doesn't have their required backdoors (yes, they don't require that quite yet. But they will, soon as they realize that what they require now won't be sufficient).
That's a bold statement to come from the world's largest car maker.
Or, not so much. He (she/it) is making a statement that seven years from now they'll stop DESIGNING IC engine cars. NOT that they'll stop MAKING them then...
So, the current head of VW is saying that his successor (or his successor's successor) is going to stop with the IC engines.
Note that most modern cars will last a couple hundred thousand miles (say, 15-20 years), so this is a promise (?) that there won't be any VW internal combustion cars on the road by 2050 or so....
Oddly enough, your first example doesn't even involve an Uber driver. So I'm not sure what the point is.
And the provenance of the second example is...questionable. Wow, two guys fighting. Were either or both Uber drivers? No telling, really. Yeah, it was so asserted by the poster, but so what? I can take a pic of my nephews fighting and call it a fight between Uber drivers (or an Uber driver and a Secret Service agent, or an Uber driver and a Russian gangster, or an Uber driver and a waiter at the local pub, or a Secret Service agent and a Russian gangster....)
I'm curious as to just how a two hour parking limit affects air pollution. Seems to me that parked vehicles generally produce ZERO nitrogen dioxide.
Though I suppose it's possible that in Madrid they generally leave their cars running when they park them....
On an unrelated note, I thought diesels were supposed to be cleaner then gasoline engines. So why do they allow older gasoline engines than diesels (2000+ for gas, 2006+ for diesels)? Does the Mayor of Madrid (or Prime Minister, since I assume Parliament meets in Madrid) drive a 2000 gasoline car or something similar?
he Dragon crew capsule crams 7 people into 10 m^2 of pressurized space
Seven people crammed into 10 SQUARE meters??? Just how do they flatten the people down to two-dimensions? Very heavy weights? Or run over them with the boring machine?
The question is weather he made even stupider decisions because he thought tech would save him.
Was there a thunderstorm? Blizzard? I find myself wondering what the weather had to do with what happened, or didn't.
For what it's worth, the description of events in TFA makes it look like the only dangerous things happening that night were police officers swerving across traffic lanes to keep other cars away from the idiot driver (I won't say "drunk driver", since it was mentioned that he was given a field-sobriety test, but no mention was made of the results, which makes me suspect that he wasn't. on the other hand, law in that State may have made mention of the results of the sobriety test illegal...). Personally, I would be inclined to think that three police cars could quietly box him in (one in front, one behind, one beside) and get him off the road....
Okay. Learn something every day. If the Fed says a business doesn't have to take cash, they're right, by definition (since they're the ones who define the rules).....
Umm, you can stroll down to your local Walmart, Dollar Store, Gas Station and trade your cash for a pre-paid "credit-card" anytime.
True enough.
Alas, I have to come down on the other side of the issue.
Ever take a close look at a dollar bill? Left side of the bill has the statement "This certificate is legal tender for all debts public and private".
Which would pretty much make it mandatory for businesses in the USA to accept cash.
Mind you, I haven't handled cash in years. Other than getting $50 or so for my wife from the bank now and then, since she still likes to be able to use cash. The fact that she asks for $50 only two or three times a year shows she's not using cash much, though....
Still, that "legal tender..." statement looks like it would require any business to take cash....
The US Government ironically sustains their stance against legalizing cannabis not because it's actually fit for Schedule I restrictions, but because it's not deadly enough. Alcohol not only kills tens of thousands every year,
Yeah, we should ban alcohol! Because that would save lives by the tens of thousands, with no downsides whatsoever!
What's that you say? It's been tried already? Well, then, why were we silly enough to stop the Noble Experiment? It couldn't have failed to achieve the intended results, after all....
I foresee dead astronauts. Redundancies cost money, and unless it's very clearly in the specs, it won't be there.
Presumably, you're talking about the redundant rocket engines in the original LM? What's that? The LM didn't have redundant rocket engines? But..but..how is this even possible, that the Government, of all people, could skip the redundancies that EVIL Private Industry would skip to save money???
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, 2018 mass shootings at concerts....
Nope, there weren't any. Closest was a series of shootings at Mardi Gras. Three dead, in unrelated instances, only a "mass shooting" if you define Mardi Gras as a single event (as opposed to a 24+hour party covering the whole city)....
Somehow, I can't really see "we decided to put off making the decision required to end the impasse until next year" as making progress toward resolving the impasse....
Using that logic, we can truly say that we've resolved the AGW issue in its entirety at this point, and so nothing else needs to be done....
USA Today. It's about as scientific a domain as the The Times of London or Der Tagesspiegel.
Your point was? I mean other, than trying to look smarter than you are....
Yeah, it would be terrifying to have a Chernobyl happening every day, wouldn't it? I mean, that would mean that nuclear power would produce almost as many fatalities as New York City traffic does....
Assuming a Chernobyl every day, of course. If we had TWO Chernobyls daily, we'd have almost as many nuclear-related fatalities as New York City AND Los Angeles traffic deaths produce.
Note, by the by, that the New York City traffic deaths produce more fatalities every decade produce more fatalities then nuclear power has in all of history, even if you include Hiroshima and Nagasaki as "nuclear power related deaths".....
It means "almost as big as Alaska"....
It also means that an article written for an American audience, quoting an American scientist (who presumably wants her audience to understand her), uses comparatives understandable to most Americans....
Probably.
It's quite likely they're better educated than the people who aren't bright enough to divide by three when dealing with small numbers of significant digits (y'know like "100 feet" - no they aren't dealing with a 99.5 - 100.49 foot tsunami, and ignoring the possible 100.7 foot tsunami....)
And how long will such "supervision" with "proven track records of secure, fair, and trustworthy dealing with the public" stay that way when they make money hand over fist by being a little bit less "secure, fair, and trustworthy"?
What's the turnaround time?
One of those turboprops it's supposed to replace can be back in the air in an hour. Can this thing be recharged in an hour? Or are we talking buying four or five of these to replace every turboprop? Or 40-50 of these, if they only carry single-digit passengers....
Classic example...
"their believe" should be "their beliefs".
"there behavior" should be "their behavior".
The really appalling thing was that you got "their" right once, but managed to lose it within five words. Which tells me you got it right the one time by pure luck, which applies even to "global stupidity"....
"If you always thought that, you were always wrong"....
If for no other reason than to minimize rainwater pooling on the roof...
True. However, another article on the subject used the number $90.2M. Which might just mean that the one article was in Aussie Dollars and the other in US dollars. Or it might mean that one or the other or neither was correct.
Note also that exactly what was included in the $66M or $90.2M wasn't mentioned. The battery only? The battery plus wiring to link it to grid? All that and the building? All that, the building and the break room for the technicians? All of the above, plus a new SUV for the executive in charge of the project?
Creative accounting has been used for a long time to conceal the true cost of a new project. Don't know whether that was done here, and I doubt you do either (unless you're one of the project engineers, anyways)....
It's a 20 month breakeven IF the Real World (tm) matches the estimate. Do note that while the Title said "saved $40 million", TFS says "they estimate that the battery allows annual savings in the wholesale market approaching $40 million".
Note that word "estimate", it's important. It's the difference between "saved $40M", and "might save $40M". And since the battery was turned on this past Friday, that $40M is NOT a description of what the battery has done, but of what it might do over the next 12 months.
That aside, how much did this battery cost? Less than $385M, I assume since it's part of a plan that cost $385M. If it, and its infrastructure (the building it's in, the wiring, etc) actually cost the $90.2M that another article says it did, then it'll pay for itself in three years or so. And then they'll have the hassle of recycling it. Won't that be fun?
For what it's worth, the evidence is that EVERY generation looks back on the ones that have gone before with some degree of disgust....
And who gets to decide if you've "provided as much technical assistance and information as possible"?
And on what basis will they make the decision?
Hint: it's probably not the hypothetical "you", and they'll decide based on whether you've provided the cleartext they asked for....
Wonder how long it'll be before the Aussie gov has to start blocking large chunks of the internet, to keep people from locating encryption software that doesn't have their required backdoors (yes, they don't require that quite yet. But they will, soon as they realize that what they require now won't be sufficient).
Or, not so much. He (she/it) is making a statement that seven years from now they'll stop DESIGNING IC engine cars. NOT that they'll stop MAKING them then...
So, the current head of VW is saying that his successor (or his successor's successor) is going to stop with the IC engines.
Note that most modern cars will last a couple hundred thousand miles (say, 15-20 years), so this is a promise (?) that there won't be any VW internal combustion cars on the road by 2050 or so....
Oddly enough, your first example doesn't even involve an Uber driver. So I'm not sure what the point is.
And the provenance of the second example is...questionable. Wow, two guys fighting. Were either or both Uber drivers? No telling, really. Yeah, it was so asserted by the poster, but so what? I can take a pic of my nephews fighting and call it a fight between Uber drivers (or an Uber driver and a Secret Service agent, or an Uber driver and a Russian gangster, or an Uber driver and a waiter at the local pub, or a Secret Service agent and a Russian gangster....)
I'm curious as to just how a two hour parking limit affects air pollution. Seems to me that parked vehicles generally produce ZERO nitrogen dioxide.
Though I suppose it's possible that in Madrid they generally leave their cars running when they park them....
On an unrelated note, I thought diesels were supposed to be cleaner then gasoline engines. So why do they allow older gasoline engines than diesels (2000+ for gas, 2006+ for diesels)? Does the Mayor of Madrid (or Prime Minister, since I assume Parliament meets in Madrid) drive a 2000 gasoline car or something similar?
If, as is often stated here, renewables are the most cost-effective energy sources, then they shouldn't need subsidies.
And if they Do, in fact, need the subsidies, then they're NOT the most cost-effective energy sources....
Seven people crammed into 10 SQUARE meters??? Just how do they flatten the people down to two-dimensions? Very heavy weights? Or run over them with the boring machine?
Was there a thunderstorm? Blizzard? I find myself wondering what the weather had to do with what happened, or didn't.
For what it's worth, the description of events in TFA makes it look like the only dangerous things happening that night were police officers swerving across traffic lanes to keep other cars away from the idiot driver (I won't say "drunk driver", since it was mentioned that he was given a field-sobriety test, but no mention was made of the results, which makes me suspect that he wasn't. on the other hand, law in that State may have made mention of the results of the sobriety test illegal...). Personally, I would be inclined to think that three police cars could quietly box him in (one in front, one behind, one beside) and get him off the road....
Okay. Learn something every day. If the Fed says a business doesn't have to take cash, they're right, by definition (since they're the ones who define the rules).....
True enough.
Alas, I have to come down on the other side of the issue.
Ever take a close look at a dollar bill? Left side of the bill has the statement "This certificate is legal tender for all debts public and private".
Which would pretty much make it mandatory for businesses in the USA to accept cash.
Mind you, I haven't handled cash in years. Other than getting $50 or so for my wife from the bank now and then, since she still likes to be able to use cash. The fact that she asks for $50 only two or three times a year shows she's not using cash much, though....
Still, that "legal tender..." statement looks like it would require any business to take cash....
Yeah, we should ban alcohol! Because that would save lives by the tens of thousands, with no downsides whatsoever!
What's that you say? It's been tried already? Well, then, why were we silly enough to stop the Noble Experiment? It couldn't have failed to achieve the intended results, after all....
What about when you are skinny and have diabetes? 188 cm, 75 kg, diabetic here. Of course, my excuse is lack of several internal organs, not sugar....
Presumably, you're talking about the redundant rocket engines in the original LM? What's that? The LM didn't have redundant rocket engines? But..but..how is this even possible, that the Government, of all people, could skip the redundancies that EVIL Private Industry would skip to save money???