Theranos was also still paying for her mansion in Los Altos,
The other stuff is the normal corporate stupidity of giving executives too many privileges. But this is fraud. It could be her mansion, and she was paying for it from her personal funds. Or it could be Theranos' mansion, and she was paying the company rent to live in it. But having the company pay for "her" house is fraud (it's not a legitimate business expense, so she's essentially stealing money from the shareholders), and probably tax evasion (company gets to write it off as a tax-free expense, she doesn't have to pay income taxes on the benefit received).
The range hood should be at least 400CFM for the gas stove that's installed. But due to the duct work, will need to be even higher. And it should be turned on to at least low even when just boiling water for tea.
I agree with the rest of your post (the exhaust fan on my stove sucks). But what's your rationale for this? Boiled water is just water vapor. And natural gas (methane) only combusts into CO2 and H2O (water vapor) unless you introduce other reactants or starve it of oxygen. They've been trying for ages to get it to form other things like methanol (convert one of the H into OH) since it's liquid at room temperature and thus easier to store and transport. But it's really, really hard. It seems to me drinking the tea would introduce far more exotic chemicals to your body than heating the water.
The apps which got caught doing this are just the stupid ones. There's no reason for the app to send the data directly to Facebook. The Realtor.com app could send the data to Realtor.com first, then they send the data to Facebook without you ever knowing.
There are only two ways to prevent this sort of sharing with a third party. Legislation like the EU has adopted. Or reading the EULAs like a hawk and not using any app which states that they share usage info with other companies.
Every time I point this out, the EV advocates mod me down. The Nissan Leaf comes with a 40 kWh battery, approximately 80% of which is usable (32 kWh). Charging efficiency happens to be about 80%, so you need to use about 40 kWh of electricity to top the battery off with 32 kWh.
The average American home uses 10,399 kWh in a year, or about 28.5 kWh per day. (Apparently a typical Japanese home uses a lot less.) So half-charging a Leaf every day (roughly 50 miles/day use) increases household electricity consumption by (20 kWh / 28.5 kWh) = 0.7 = 70%. Since all that additional electricity consumption happens overnight, if every house has an EV then suddenly the peak electricity consumption period switches from mid-day to overnight. And the lower electricity prices people are expecting to pay to recharge their EV evaporates. Moreso if there's significant solar power generation in the grid. Since solar provides electricity only during the day, the electricity during night to charge all these EVs will have to come from generators the power companies can spool up to meet the overnight demand spike. (Storing solar power in batteries for overnight use is not cost-effective unless solar generation exceeds 100% of daytime consumption. It makes no sense to run other power generators during the day just so you can store solar power in batteries for use during the night, when you can just use the solar power directly during the day (avoiding battery losses) and run the other power generators during the night.)
Meaning you're going to be paying the highest electricity rates to charge your EV, not the lowest. Modding me down doesn't change this truth. The same truth that lets your EV battery power your home for more than a day, also means the power pricing peak will invert when every home has an EV charging overnight.
Most Japanese do not live in single family residences with dedicated garage space. Most live in apartments with shared parking, where is no way to get electricity from "your" EV to "your" home. The buildings are simply not wired up that way. Maybe newer apartments can be wired so an EV charger in your assigned parking slot gets tied in to the meter (and wiring) of your apartment. But that seems like it'd be excessively complicated - I imagine most such chargers will simply tap into the building's main power line, and its dedicated meter is added up with the apartment unit's meter to calculate the monthly power bill.
Unfortunately, this 1:1 transference of electricity from your EV to your home is necessary if you want people to conserve the power to stretch it out through a multi-day power outage. If you turn the electricity into a shared resource, the tragedy of the commons kicks in. And people start using all the electricity they can giving little thought to conserving it. Japanese culture might help counter that (they place a high emphasis on responsibility to society). But one bad apple in the apartment drawing lots of wattage for an AC, water heater, and playing games on his high-end PC could put a significant dent in the available power across all EVs powering the building.
You just need to run a firewall app, which blocks all network access attempts by an app. I use AFWall+ but it requires root. NoRoot Firewall seems to be popular among non-rooted people. It sets up a fake VPN on your phone that it controls. Since all network traffic is redirected through the VPN, the firewall can block whichever apps you choose to block.
You have to re-enable access if the app needs network access to use (like the FB app). But that's actually less work with a firewall than modifying the/etc/hosts file every time you run a certain app. I don't use the FB app so haven't had this problem.
It was a big deal for the creators of the videos, because three 'strikes' in a 90-day period are enough to get a YouTuber permanently banned from the platform.
I would assume then that there's a corollary policy, where a YouTuber who gets three takedown notices rescinded in a 90-day period is also permanently banned from the platform (or at least permanently banned from issuing takedown notices)?
The dispute boils down to Qualcomm wanting a percentage of the total phone price as a licensing fee, Apple wanting to pay a percentage of the component (radio) price as a licensing fee. Ironically, this the same BS Apple tried to pull on Samsung. Apple wanted Samsung to pay them a percentage of the phone's price to license some of their patents, while paying Samsung only a few cents to license Samsung's FRAND patents since that fee was based on the component price. So in that respect, Apple is being hoisted by their own petard here.
In both cases, I am for licensing fees based on the component price. Which means I was against Apple in Apple vs Samsung, and am for Apple in Apple vs Qualcomm. Licensing fees based on a percentage of the total product price is stupid. If a company making $100,000 trucks decided to integrate cellular connectivity to allow the truck to constantly keep its location and status updated with the operating company, they'd end up having to pay Qualcomm thousands of dollars per truck to license a part that costs less than $10.
The modern foil fencing saber is a bastardized form of the original saber, altered to be more foil-like to increase the excitement from lightning-quick thrusts and parries. The original saber is meant to be twirled. When you make a sweeping cut with a straight sword, you lose all the energy you put into the blow if it misses the target. But because you twirl a saber, the rotational energy you put into it builds up and is retained until you hit something. That's why it's so prominently curved - when you twirl it most of your hits are going to slicing blows, and curving the blade allows you to make slices with less chance of getting the blade stuck (contact is along a shorter length of the edge). Same reason cavalry sabers were curved - so they wouldn't get stuck and ripped out of your hand while you struck a blow from horseback.
In that respect, the light saber duels in the movies with their "fancy" twirling and spinning is actually somewhat historically accurate to its namesake (more so than the fencing saber). And if people want to want to do this type of sparring using fake light sabers instead of traditional curved sabers, then all the ore power to them. (Presumably they're not curved because they can slice through anything so can't get stuck.)
For those who haven't seen (felt) polymer banknotes (i.e. Americans), they're like Tyvek sheeting used to wrap houses and also for certain large USPS envelopes (visit the post office). Very strong, durable, and tear resistant.
U.S. currency has to go through certain, brutal tests before it's approved. One of these tests is to roll it into a tight cylinder inside a metal tube, then a piston travels down the tube to smash the paper cylinder down length-wise. This test is repeated multiple times. Any new bill or security feature has to survive this process before the U.S. will adopt it. This is why U.S. bills don't have large holograms like bills from some other countries - this rolling/crushing test destroys them. This is probably also why we haven't adopted polymer notes yet. The polymer notes are resistant to folding, and this test is pretty much the ultimate force-fold test. It probably weakens if not tears some of the plastic fibers substantially, whereas the more pliable plant fibers in paper bills can survive it.
Medical quack cures during the middle ages spread via word of mouth among the clueless masses.
Modern social media is a way for the clueless masses to quickly spread (mis)information via word of mouth.
During the interim period, we had broadcasting - a few people communicating to many, via books, newspapers, radio, and finally TV. These forms of communication cost money, so they were only available to people or organizations willing and able to pay for it. That meant what they were saying usually had to first go through some sort of vetting process, to make sure it wasn't wasting their time and money.
Then the Internet happened. It's given us lots of great things, but it's also led to a regression of information dissemination. Social media costs nothing to use, meaning that the rumors and hearsay spreading among the masses are once again able to drown out the volume of information from authoritative sources.
People keep championing censorship as the solution (companies and organizations doing "fact-checking" and deliberately squelching info they deem to be incorrect). While that can work, it's incredibly risky. All a wannabe-dictator has to do is replace the fact checkers with people sympathetic to his cause, and the whole thing gets re-purposed into a system to control and subjugate the masses. The proper solution is to educate people, so they're better able to decide for themselves what's true and what's quackery. Unfortunately that's a lot harder than censorship, so lots of people who really should know better are advocating trading off some of their freedom for better security against quacks.
The decay chain of U-238 includes many isotopes which give off beta and gamma radiation. Most of that energy is given off via alpha particles. But it's not true that a sheet of paper or your dead skin cells will block all if it.
That said, this was uranium ore, which is typically only about 0.1% uranium. Uranium and its decay products have a radioactivity of 12,356 Bq (decays per second) per gram, so you'd expect ore to be about 12.4 Bq per gram.
In contrast, potassium chloride is commonly used as a salt substitute in low-sodium salt products. It's about 0.0118% naturally-occurring K-40, which is radioactive (beta radiation even). That gives potassium a radioactivity of about 0.032 Bq/mg = 32 Bq per gram
So the exposure visitors got from these buckets of uranium ore was probably less than you get walking past the water softener bags in the supermarket. In fact, looking at the table on page 2 of the potassium chloride link, you'd expect baked potatoes, milk, orange juice, bananas, hamburgers, and roast chicken to be more radioactive (gram per gram) than these buckets of uranium ore.
Lots of people can do 40 pushups. I can do it, and I'm hardly in good shape. If you read the actual paper, it's 40 pushups timed to a metronome set at 80 beats per minute. Or 40 pushups in 30 seconds. That's a lot harder.
You wouldn't need to add a "Timeline" feature if your forced Win 10 updates weren't automatically rebooting computers overnight, closing millions of working apps and web pages without user consent. People only need help picking up where they left off because you're closing everything without their approval.
Buying carbon credits, or buying electricity from a renewable power source doesn't reduce greenhouse gases. All it does is force someone else who was buying carbon credits or buying renewable power to switch to fossil fuel power. If the power grid is 15% renewable and your business operations expand to add 1 TWh of demand to it in a year, that extra TWh has to be generated by fossil fuels because that's the only energy source which can ramp up to match excess demand. You cannot make the sun shine longer onto PV panels, you cannot make the wind blow harder, you cannot make more rain fall into a hydroelectric reservoir. Your shell game where you buy "your" electricity from renewable sources means someone else's electricity gets pushed out of the renewable shell into the fossil fuel shell, resulting in no net change for the country overall.
The only way to increase renewable power consumption is to build new renewable energy generation facilities. If you're not adding renewable capacity, then all this brouhaha over 50% zero carbon is just marketing glitz with zero real improvement. Every company can claim 100% of their energy comes from renewables even though renewables only supply 15% of the country's energy, as long as no single company exceeds 15% of the nation's energy consumption.
Yeah, it's the "trick" questions which are inappropriate because they require a moment of inspiration. Questions like, "why does a mirror reverse left and right, but not up and down?" Although a brilliant applicant will take less time on average to figure it out, the random variance in time to solve is so large that the info you glean from a sample of one is virtually nil.
I got a question about function pointers in one of my interviews, which I considered a legit question since I was a non-programmer applying for a programming job. The guy wanted to see how extensive my programming knowledge was, so asked a question which required knowledge of a rather obscure programming topic to solve. I'd never read up on them, much less used them. But I knew they existed and that they were called function pointers. That seemed to satisfy the guy (probably figured I could look it up if I knew what they were called).
Testing what the candidate knows is fine. Testing if the candidate has claimed competency is fine. Testing with questions which require you to figure out a trick to answer correctly is stupid. As for the mirror question...
A mirror doesn't reverse left and right. It reverses front and back. When you wave your right hand in a mirror, the hand on the right side of the mirror image waves back. You only perceive it as the mirror image's left hand because front and back are reversed.
So far out of the 8 people I've hired/recommended, only one didn't work out.
This is another problem with the modern interview process - you only get to see half the results. Your success rate among hires is 87.5%. But you have nothing to compare that against because you don't know what the success rate would've been for the people you didn't hire. Who knows, maybe 90% of the people your interview process filtered out would've made good employees too, and your interview process is actually picking worse candidates than random chance?
The only method I've been able to think of to test this is for management to hire "perfect applicants" to apply for job listings at their company. People with a made-up history, skill set, and knowledge which makes them perfect for a job. See how far they get through the HR filtering and interview process. If HR or an interviewer rejects them, then that indicates a problem with HR or the interviewer.
At the risk of stating the obvious, making "a face and a spastic hand motion" that equates physical disability with low intelligence is offensive in itself, regardless of who you're talking to.
So is calling Bush a chimp. I'd have a lot more respect for the left's criticism of Trump's offensive remarks, if they would at least criticize their own for making equally offensive remarks.
It is wrong to make fun of a person for things they have no control over (their appearance, disabilities, race, gender, etc), no matter who is doing it and who the target is. "My guy" doesn't automatically get a free pass, "your guy" doesn't automatically become a valid target. It is always wrong.
Motorola already has this option. You can use the fingerprint sensor to replace the back / home / running apps / power buttons. Back becomes a left swipe, home becomes a short tap, running apps becomes a right swipe, and power becomes a long tap.
It takes a little getting used to, and I still perform the wrong action maybe 1 in 20 times (mostly a problem with short and long and extremely long tap not being different enough - the last one activates Google Assistant which I never use; wish I could adjust the activation durations). But it turns out to be more convenient because (1) the Android buttons are now pop-up overlays which disappear to give the running app the entire screen, and require a tap or swipe up to make them reappear, and (2) you don't have to move your finger around to reach for the different button locations. So all four functions always available with no extra gestures needed, and are all four are always in the same location so you don't have to visually spot them to move your finger to the correct one.
However, not everyone likes this. And I think the most important thing is that Motorola gives you the option to pick whichever method you like - the original style buttons, or using gestures. Historically, Google has had this bad Apple-like habit of forcing you to adopt their newfangled system even if you prefer the old way.
A 15" Macbook Pro actually has a 15.4" diagonal screen (16:10 aspect ratio, vs 15.6" 16:9 aspect ratio for most PC laptops). So you're going to be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a 16" and the existing 15" model. A 16.0" screen would have 16^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.07944 or just 8% more screen area than the 15". Most people won't be able to tell them apart unless they're side-by-side. A 16.5" screen would have 16.5^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.148 or 15% more screen area than the 15", which might be noticeable.
By contrast, the 17" model (17.0" 16:10 aspect ratio, vs 17.3" 16:9 aspect ratio for most PC laptops) was 17^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.2186 or 22% more screen area than the 15", which is definitely noticeable.
The GS analysis is wrong because it assumes that once cured, the person is thereafter immortal - immune from further diseases or decrepitude. That's obviously wrong. If you cure someone so they don't die from one disease, they will inevitably die for some other reason. Sometimes by an accident, but usually due to some other disease. So curing a disease so fewer people die from it, actually increases the number of people who will die from other diseases (minus a few more deaths due to accidents).
So if the analysis is done properly:
Treating a person for one disease until they die from it results in you being paid only to treat that one disease.
Curing a person of one disease means you get paid to cure them, plus you also get paid to treat them for the disease which will eventually kill them.
And obviously there's more money to be made from the latter. GS is committing the same incorrect comparison to a zero base state I've mentioned before. Where the person leaves out indirect consequences of their actions from the comparison (in this case, the person dying from a different disease some time in the future).
Actually, all of Asia is. The concept that companies shouldn't steal secrets from each other simply doesn't exist in Asia. The notion that you can protect an idea using a patent or copyright or NDA or non-compete agreement is alien. In Asia, if a company wants to protect its secrets, it should work to protect those secrets. If their secrets get stolen, people figure its their own fault for not protecting them well enough. Corporate espionage is the norm. You may have seen this in anime or manga, where an employee is required to infiltrate another company to spy on them. The employee can be fired if they refuse.
When East meets West, you have a bunch of naive westerners blissfully running head-first into espionage methods which have been honed for over a century. It's a lot like how it must've been when the native Americans with bows and arrows were slaughtered by European firearms. Westerners have never put much thought into protecting themselves from this type of direct espionage because they've always been coddled and protected by their social norm that it was inherently wrong for companies to steal secrets from each other. So they will blissfully plug in their devices to recharge during a visit, or hand them over for "security checks" at the airport (during which the hard drive is removed and an image is made), or install a state-of-the-art manufacturing tool relying on a few screws holding the cover in place to protect the secrets that are held within.
A good example is China's high speed rail. China had no knowledge about how to construct high speed rail. They opened up bidding to foreign companies, dangling the carrot of building thousands of miles of track and trains. TGV wisely passed. Siemens took the bait. They inked a deal where Siemens would manufacture trains for China for a few years, but with the curious stipulation that the manufacturing had to be done in China. Siemens probably thought that after a few years, they'd be facing bids from other high speed rail companies again. What actually happened was the Chinese strip-mined everything they could from Siemens' manufacturing processes in China, duplicated it on their own, and gave Siemens the boot once the period of the original agreement was up.
Slashdot Mirror
The other stuff is the normal corporate stupidity of giving executives too many privileges. But this is fraud. It could be her mansion, and she was paying for it from her personal funds. Or it could be Theranos' mansion, and she was paying the company rent to live in it. But having the company pay for "her" house is fraud (it's not a legitimate business expense, so she's essentially stealing money from the shareholders), and probably tax evasion (company gets to write it off as a tax-free expense, she doesn't have to pay income taxes on the benefit received).
I agree with the rest of your post (the exhaust fan on my stove sucks). But what's your rationale for this? Boiled water is just water vapor. And natural gas (methane) only combusts into CO2 and H2O (water vapor) unless you introduce other reactants or starve it of oxygen. They've been trying for ages to get it to form other things like methanol (convert one of the H into OH) since it's liquid at room temperature and thus easier to store and transport. But it's really, really hard. It seems to me drinking the tea would introduce far more exotic chemicals to your body than heating the water.
The apps which got caught doing this are just the stupid ones. There's no reason for the app to send the data directly to Facebook. The Realtor.com app could send the data to Realtor.com first, then they send the data to Facebook without you ever knowing.
There are only two ways to prevent this sort of sharing with a third party. Legislation like the EU has adopted. Or reading the EULAs like a hawk and not using any app which states that they share usage info with other companies.
A hatred of "clear hateful ideas or narratives" itself constitute a clear hateful idea.
Every time I point this out, the EV advocates mod me down. The Nissan Leaf comes with a 40 kWh battery, approximately 80% of which is usable (32 kWh). Charging efficiency happens to be about 80%, so you need to use about 40 kWh of electricity to top the battery off with 32 kWh.
The average American home uses 10,399 kWh in a year, or about 28.5 kWh per day. (Apparently a typical Japanese home uses a lot less.) So half-charging a Leaf every day (roughly 50 miles/day use) increases household electricity consumption by (20 kWh / 28.5 kWh) = 0.7 = 70%. Since all that additional electricity consumption happens overnight, if every house has an EV then suddenly the peak electricity consumption period switches from mid-day to overnight. And the lower electricity prices people are expecting to pay to recharge their EV evaporates. Moreso if there's significant solar power generation in the grid. Since solar provides electricity only during the day, the electricity during night to charge all these EVs will have to come from generators the power companies can spool up to meet the overnight demand spike. (Storing solar power in batteries for overnight use is not cost-effective unless solar generation exceeds 100% of daytime consumption. It makes no sense to run other power generators during the day just so you can store solar power in batteries for use during the night, when you can just use the solar power directly during the day (avoiding battery losses) and run the other power generators during the night.)
Meaning you're going to be paying the highest electricity rates to charge your EV, not the lowest. Modding me down doesn't change this truth. The same truth that lets your EV battery power your home for more than a day, also means the power pricing peak will invert when every home has an EV charging overnight.
Most Japanese do not live in single family residences with dedicated garage space. Most live in apartments with shared parking, where is no way to get electricity from "your" EV to "your" home. The buildings are simply not wired up that way. Maybe newer apartments can be wired so an EV charger in your assigned parking slot gets tied in to the meter (and wiring) of your apartment. But that seems like it'd be excessively complicated - I imagine most such chargers will simply tap into the building's main power line, and its dedicated meter is added up with the apartment unit's meter to calculate the monthly power bill.
Unfortunately, this 1:1 transference of electricity from your EV to your home is necessary if you want people to conserve the power to stretch it out through a multi-day power outage. If you turn the electricity into a shared resource, the tragedy of the commons kicks in. And people start using all the electricity they can giving little thought to conserving it. Japanese culture might help counter that (they place a high emphasis on responsibility to society). But one bad apple in the apartment drawing lots of wattage for an AC, water heater, and playing games on his high-end PC could put a significant dent in the available power across all EVs powering the building.
You just need to run a firewall app, which blocks all network access attempts by an app. I use AFWall+ but it requires root. NoRoot Firewall seems to be popular among non-rooted people. It sets up a fake VPN on your phone that it controls. Since all network traffic is redirected through the VPN, the firewall can block whichever apps you choose to block.
/etc/hosts file every time you run a certain app. I don't use the FB app so haven't had this problem.
You have to re-enable access if the app needs network access to use (like the FB app). But that's actually less work with a firewall than modifying the
I would assume then that there's a corollary policy, where a YouTuber who gets three takedown notices rescinded in a 90-day period is also permanently banned from the platform (or at least permanently banned from issuing takedown notices)?
The dispute boils down to Qualcomm wanting a percentage of the total phone price as a licensing fee, Apple wanting to pay a percentage of the component (radio) price as a licensing fee. Ironically, this the same BS Apple tried to pull on Samsung. Apple wanted Samsung to pay them a percentage of the phone's price to license some of their patents, while paying Samsung only a few cents to license Samsung's FRAND patents since that fee was based on the component price. So in that respect, Apple is being hoisted by their own petard here.
In both cases, I am for licensing fees based on the component price. Which means I was against Apple in Apple vs Samsung, and am for Apple in Apple vs Qualcomm. Licensing fees based on a percentage of the total product price is stupid. If a company making $100,000 trucks decided to integrate cellular connectivity to allow the truck to constantly keep its location and status updated with the operating company, they'd end up having to pay Qualcomm thousands of dollars per truck to license a part that costs less than $10.
The modern foil fencing saber is a bastardized form of the original saber, altered to be more foil-like to increase the excitement from lightning-quick thrusts and parries. The original saber is meant to be twirled. When you make a sweeping cut with a straight sword, you lose all the energy you put into the blow if it misses the target. But because you twirl a saber, the rotational energy you put into it builds up and is retained until you hit something. That's why it's so prominently curved - when you twirl it most of your hits are going to slicing blows, and curving the blade allows you to make slices with less chance of getting the blade stuck (contact is along a shorter length of the edge). Same reason cavalry sabers were curved - so they wouldn't get stuck and ripped out of your hand while you struck a blow from horseback.
In that respect, the light saber duels in the movies with their "fancy" twirling and spinning is actually somewhat historically accurate to its namesake (more so than the fencing saber). And if people want to want to do this type of sparring using fake light sabers instead of traditional curved sabers, then all the ore power to them. (Presumably they're not curved because they can slice through anything so can't get stuck.)
Little-known fact. Any speaker can be used as a rudimentary microphone, any microphone as a rudimentary speaker. The two devices are actually the same. One moves air in response to electrical impulses, one creates electrical impulses in response to air movement.
So if you're really concerned about your family's privacy, the key is not to give anything with a microphone or speaker Internet access.
For those who haven't seen (felt) polymer banknotes (i.e. Americans), they're like Tyvek sheeting used to wrap houses and also for certain large USPS envelopes (visit the post office). Very strong, durable, and tear resistant.
U.S. currency has to go through certain, brutal tests before it's approved. One of these tests is to roll it into a tight cylinder inside a metal tube, then a piston travels down the tube to smash the paper cylinder down length-wise. This test is repeated multiple times. Any new bill or security feature has to survive this process before the U.S. will adopt it. This is why U.S. bills don't have large holograms like bills from some other countries - this rolling/crushing test destroys them. This is probably also why we haven't adopted polymer notes yet. The polymer notes are resistant to folding, and this test is pretty much the ultimate force-fold test. It probably weakens if not tears some of the plastic fibers substantially, whereas the more pliable plant fibers in paper bills can survive it.
Medical quack cures during the middle ages spread via word of mouth among the clueless masses.
Modern social media is a way for the clueless masses to quickly spread (mis)information via word of mouth.
During the interim period, we had broadcasting - a few people communicating to many, via books, newspapers, radio, and finally TV. These forms of communication cost money, so they were only available to people or organizations willing and able to pay for it. That meant what they were saying usually had to first go through some sort of vetting process, to make sure it wasn't wasting their time and money.
Then the Internet happened. It's given us lots of great things, but it's also led to a regression of information dissemination. Social media costs nothing to use, meaning that the rumors and hearsay spreading among the masses are once again able to drown out the volume of information from authoritative sources.
People keep championing censorship as the solution (companies and organizations doing "fact-checking" and deliberately squelching info they deem to be incorrect). While that can work, it's incredibly risky. All a wannabe-dictator has to do is replace the fact checkers with people sympathetic to his cause, and the whole thing gets re-purposed into a system to control and subjugate the masses. The proper solution is to educate people, so they're better able to decide for themselves what's true and what's quackery. Unfortunately that's a lot harder than censorship, so lots of people who really should know better are advocating trading off some of their freedom for better security against quacks.
The decay chain of U-238 includes many isotopes which give off beta and gamma radiation. Most of that energy is given off via alpha particles. But it's not true that a sheet of paper or your dead skin cells will block all if it.
That said, this was uranium ore, which is typically only about 0.1% uranium. Uranium and its decay products have a radioactivity of 12,356 Bq (decays per second) per gram, so you'd expect ore to be about 12.4 Bq per gram.
In contrast, potassium chloride is commonly used as a salt substitute in low-sodium salt products. It's about 0.0118% naturally-occurring K-40, which is radioactive (beta radiation even). That gives potassium a radioactivity of about 0.032 Bq/mg = 32 Bq per gram
So the exposure visitors got from these buckets of uranium ore was probably less than you get walking past the water softener bags in the supermarket. In fact, looking at the table on page 2 of the potassium chloride link, you'd expect baked potatoes, milk, orange juice, bananas, hamburgers, and roast chicken to be more radioactive (gram per gram) than these buckets of uranium ore.
Lots of people can do 40 pushups. I can do it, and I'm hardly in good shape. If you read the actual paper, it's 40 pushups timed to a metronome set at 80 beats per minute. Or 40 pushups in 30 seconds. That's a lot harder.
You wouldn't need to add a "Timeline" feature if your forced Win 10 updates weren't automatically rebooting computers overnight, closing millions of working apps and web pages without user consent. People only need help picking up where they left off because you're closing everything without their approval.
Buying carbon credits, or buying electricity from a renewable power source doesn't reduce greenhouse gases. All it does is force someone else who was buying carbon credits or buying renewable power to switch to fossil fuel power. If the power grid is 15% renewable and your business operations expand to add 1 TWh of demand to it in a year, that extra TWh has to be generated by fossil fuels because that's the only energy source which can ramp up to match excess demand. You cannot make the sun shine longer onto PV panels, you cannot make the wind blow harder, you cannot make more rain fall into a hydroelectric reservoir. Your shell game where you buy "your" electricity from renewable sources means someone else's electricity gets pushed out of the renewable shell into the fossil fuel shell, resulting in no net change for the country overall.
The only way to increase renewable power consumption is to build new renewable energy generation facilities. If you're not adding renewable capacity, then all this brouhaha over 50% zero carbon is just marketing glitz with zero real improvement. Every company can claim 100% of their energy comes from renewables even though renewables only supply 15% of the country's energy, as long as no single company exceeds 15% of the nation's energy consumption.
Yeah, it's the "trick" questions which are inappropriate because they require a moment of inspiration. Questions like, "why does a mirror reverse left and right, but not up and down?" Although a brilliant applicant will take less time on average to figure it out, the random variance in time to solve is so large that the info you glean from a sample of one is virtually nil.
I got a question about function pointers in one of my interviews, which I considered a legit question since I was a non-programmer applying for a programming job. The guy wanted to see how extensive my programming knowledge was, so asked a question which required knowledge of a rather obscure programming topic to solve. I'd never read up on them, much less used them. But I knew they existed and that they were called function pointers. That seemed to satisfy the guy (probably figured I could look it up if I knew what they were called).
Testing what the candidate knows is fine. Testing if the candidate has claimed competency is fine. Testing with questions which require you to figure out a trick to answer correctly is stupid. As for the mirror question...
A mirror doesn't reverse left and right. It reverses front and back. When you wave your right hand in a mirror, the hand on the right side of the mirror image waves back. You only perceive it as the mirror image's left hand because front and back are reversed.
This is another problem with the modern interview process - you only get to see half the results. Your success rate among hires is 87.5%. But you have nothing to compare that against because you don't know what the success rate would've been for the people you didn't hire. Who knows, maybe 90% of the people your interview process filtered out would've made good employees too, and your interview process is actually picking worse candidates than random chance?
The only method I've been able to think of to test this is for management to hire "perfect applicants" to apply for job listings at their company. People with a made-up history, skill set, and knowledge which makes them perfect for a job. See how far they get through the HR filtering and interview process. If HR or an interviewer rejects them, then that indicates a problem with HR or the interviewer.
So is calling Bush a chimp. I'd have a lot more respect for the left's criticism of Trump's offensive remarks, if they would at least criticize their own for making equally offensive remarks.
It is wrong to make fun of a person for things they have no control over (their appearance, disabilities, race, gender, etc), no matter who is doing it and who the target is. "My guy" doesn't automatically get a free pass, "your guy" doesn't automatically become a valid target. It is always wrong.
Motorola already has this option. You can use the fingerprint sensor to replace the back / home / running apps / power buttons. Back becomes a left swipe, home becomes a short tap, running apps becomes a right swipe, and power becomes a long tap.
It takes a little getting used to, and I still perform the wrong action maybe 1 in 20 times (mostly a problem with short and long and extremely long tap not being different enough - the last one activates Google Assistant which I never use; wish I could adjust the activation durations). But it turns out to be more convenient because (1) the Android buttons are now pop-up overlays which disappear to give the running app the entire screen, and require a tap or swipe up to make them reappear, and (2) you don't have to move your finger around to reach for the different button locations. So all four functions always available with no extra gestures needed, and are all four are always in the same location so you don't have to visually spot them to move your finger to the correct one.
However, not everyone likes this. And I think the most important thing is that Motorola gives you the option to pick whichever method you like - the original style buttons, or using gestures. Historically, Google has had this bad Apple-like habit of forcing you to adopt their newfangled system even if you prefer the old way.
A 15" Macbook Pro actually has a 15.4" diagonal screen (16:10 aspect ratio, vs 15.6" 16:9 aspect ratio for most PC laptops). So you're going to be hard-pressed to tell the difference between a 16" and the existing 15" model. A 16.0" screen would have 16^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.07944 or just 8% more screen area than the 15". Most people won't be able to tell them apart unless they're side-by-side. A 16.5" screen would have 16.5^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.148 or 15% more screen area than the 15", which might be noticeable.
By contrast, the 17" model (17.0" 16:10 aspect ratio, vs 17.3" 16:9 aspect ratio for most PC laptops) was 17^2 / 15.4^2 = 1.2186 or 22% more screen area than the 15", which is definitely noticeable.
Um...
So if the analysis is done properly:
And obviously there's more money to be made from the latter. GS is committing the same incorrect comparison to a zero base state I've mentioned before. Where the person leaves out indirect consequences of their actions from the comparison (in this case, the person dying from a different disease some time in the future).
Actually, all of Asia is. The concept that companies shouldn't steal secrets from each other simply doesn't exist in Asia. The notion that you can protect an idea using a patent or copyright or NDA or non-compete agreement is alien. In Asia, if a company wants to protect its secrets, it should work to protect those secrets. If their secrets get stolen, people figure its their own fault for not protecting them well enough. Corporate espionage is the norm. You may have seen this in anime or manga, where an employee is required to infiltrate another company to spy on them. The employee can be fired if they refuse.
When East meets West, you have a bunch of naive westerners blissfully running head-first into espionage methods which have been honed for over a century. It's a lot like how it must've been when the native Americans with bows and arrows were slaughtered by European firearms. Westerners have never put much thought into protecting themselves from this type of direct espionage because they've always been coddled and protected by their social norm that it was inherently wrong for companies to steal secrets from each other. So they will blissfully plug in their devices to recharge during a visit, or hand them over for "security checks" at the airport (during which the hard drive is removed and an image is made), or install a state-of-the-art manufacturing tool relying on a few screws holding the cover in place to protect the secrets that are held within.
A good example is China's high speed rail. China had no knowledge about how to construct high speed rail. They opened up bidding to foreign companies, dangling the carrot of building thousands of miles of track and trains. TGV wisely passed. Siemens took the bait. They inked a deal where Siemens would manufacture trains for China for a few years, but with the curious stipulation that the manufacturing had to be done in China. Siemens probably thought that after a few years, they'd be facing bids from other high speed rail companies again. What actually happened was the Chinese strip-mined everything they could from Siemens' manufacturing processes in China, duplicated it on their own, and gave Siemens the boot once the period of the original agreement was up.