In many states, employers are required to pay workers overtime after 8 hours in a day. So even if the employer wants to offer 4x10 hours, they're forced to stick to 8 hour days to avoid increasing their payroll costs for the same number of hours worked.
That's what bookmarks and RSS feeds were supposed to be for. A way for you to get updates pushed to your browser without you having to visit every individual site you have bookmarked.
Facebook isn't the first iteration of this problem. It isn't even the second. Before Facebook was MySpace. Before MySpace was GeoCities. (Before GeoCities was AOL, but that more Internet access via a portal instead of TCP/IP on your computer). In each case the individual wanting to publish on the web was faced with two choices:
Buy a domain name. Buy space on a hosting service. Install Apache. Install WordPress or whatever other software you need for the type of publishing. Learn how to configure it to do what you want. Do your publishing. Inform all your family and friends of your domain. Regularly update the software and Apache to keep ahead of security exploits as they're discovered. If you do get hacked, work to clean everything up and get your site up and running again.
Or create a Facebook / MySpace / GeoCities account and let that company deal with all of the above. You only have to worry about the publishing.
That's the fundamental problem. Getting updates from multiple sites is easy. It's the site setup, maintenance, and cleanup work if you get haced (that most people wouldn't have a clue how to do anyway) that's hard. It's a lot easier just to have someone else deal with all that for you. And if that someone else requires you to sell your soul^H^H^H^Hdata and personal info for their services, people start to think that's a pretty good deal.
This is why I've constantly railed against Open Source project managers and contributors who are dismissive or condescending towards user requests. If you don't make it easy for users (people who don't know how to program) to use your software, they will just use some other software which makes it easy for them. And Facebook, Google, Apple are more than happy to give them that easy user experience easy in exchange for the user's soul.
If you want Open Source to succeed, you have to make it easy for users, not just for programmers.
U.S. military spending is huge simply because the U.S. economy is huge. If you look at military spending as percent of GDP, the U.S. doesn't even make the top 20. It's slightly above the world average (3.1% vs 2.2%). And if you factor in that the U.S. is bound by the peace treaties ending WWII to provide for Japan's national defense, it's pretty much at the world average.
Comparing based on raw dollars is like comparing food budget of an apartment complex in first world vs the food budget of a single family in a developing nation. You're ignoring differences in population and economic productivity.
Communications satellites like this one go into geostationary orbit. That's an orbit with a radius of 42,164 km, for a circumference of 264,924 km. There are currently about 1800 satellites (and dead husks) in geostationary orbit, for an average spacing of 147 km between each satellite.
The space debris problem is primarily limited to low earth orbit (about 150-1000 km altitude). It takes a lot more energy to get up to geostationary orbit, so we don't put satellites there unless we absolutely need it to stay above a fixed longitude.
itâ(TM)s thought that around 12% of all plastic waste has been incinerated, with roughly 79% accumulating in either landfill or the natural environment
Plastic originates from oil, and has the chemical form (C2H4)n for polyethelene, C2H3-x for PVC and polysyrene. When we bury it in a landfill, each C there is carbon which has been sequestered back underground, not combusted with atmospheric oxygen to produce CO2. In that respect, its resistance to biodegradation is a good thing, since it prevents bacteria in the landfill from converting it into CH4 (methane) and CO2. In a landfill locked in the form of plastic, that carbon is well and truly sequestered.
Unfortunately, TFA does not make a distinction between what percentage of plastic ends up in landfills, and what percentage in the natural environment. I'm also curious if the incineration process is high enough in temperature to yield atomic carbon (soot), or if it converts the carbon into CO2. I'm guessing the latter since that yields more energy, helping defray the cost of incineration.
But isn't the BULK of ocean plastic waste pollution (90%+) coming from 10 rivers? (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stemming-the-plastic-tide-10-rivers-contribute-most-of-the-plastic-in-the-oceans/)
If you read the article you've linked carefully, those 10 rivers account for 93% of the plastic waste entering the oceans from rivers. But they only account for ~25% of all plastic waste entering the oceans. About 73% comes from sources other than rivers if I did my math right.
A recent study estimates that more than a quarter of all that waste could be pouring in from just 10 rivers, eight of them in Asia.
This is like saying "Hey, I noticed there was a lock on the front door, so I went in the back. Clearly, this was the proper thing. There was never a lock there before!"
I'd agree with the analogy if tumblr had created all the content in the first place, content which made them famous on the web, then they decided to remove it from the web.
That's not the case here though. Users created the content, and that content was what made the site famous. Then the company unilaterally decided to pull the users' content off the web, which they're allowed to do since it's their servers hosting it. Verizon doesn't own that content though, the users who uploaded it to tumblr did. As such, Verizon doesn't have the right to selectively block archive.org from accessing that content. The copyright holder has control over distribution, not Verizon. So Verizon has no right to discriminate against who can view the artworks (unless the copyright holders ceded that right to them - I dunno what tumblr's TOS say).
So the more appropriate analogy here would be an art studio allowed people to hang their artwork on the walls of their building for the public to view. This became quite popular, making the building famous and a popular destination for tourists, and also making it quite valuable. Then suddenly the studio decides that it wants to remove some of that artwork (which it has the right to do since it's their building). Prior to the date of removal, the door is never locked. The public is still allowed to come in and view/make copies of the artwork. But when a photographer arrives to take photos of all the artwork to be removed, the studio blocks him (and only him) from entry.
While over-the-air bandwidth is bound by Shannon's limit, that only applies to shared channels. The MU-MIMO found on most 802.11ac implementations gets around this limitation by making the channels directional. It's basically a simplified form of phased array radar, where you can "point" the antenna via software rather than have to physically move it. For a visual analogy, 802.11a/b/g/n is like turning the room light on and off, and the device receive the light signal by measuring the overall brightness of the room. MIMO is like the sender shining a laser pointer at the receiver, and the receiver using a tube to reject light from any direction other than the sender's direction. Whereas the room light affects and interferes with all other light-based communication in the room (the channel is shared), the laser pointer only interferes if you happen to be in the same line as the sender to recipient. Since the information channel is no longer shared, the Shannon limit no longer applies, and everyone is able to use the full bandwidth of the airwaves simultaneously.
5G includes MIMO, enabling it to communicate with individual devices simultaneously over the same frequencies without interference. So going forward, I expect the Shannon limit to be less and less relevant to wireless communications.
As I've been saying, 5G doesn't really benefit you in the best-case scenarios people usually use for comparisons (nobody except you is using the cell tower for data). It benefits you in the worst-case scenario (lots of other people are competing with you for bandwidth to a cell tower).
Facebook has entered agreements with most if not all the major cellular carriers and phone manufacturers to pre-install the Facebook app on your phone. You can't uninstall it. You can disable it, but I've been fighting another preinstalled app called Facebook App Manager which you can't disable. It seems to be re-enabling the Facebook app (every week or so it's active again and has auto-updated to the latest version). I'd been putting off rooting the phone since it voids the warranty, but I think I'm going to have to punt the warranty and root just to kill stupid crap like this.
Facebook is well known for tracking you even if you don't have a Facebook account. Those little 'f' icons you see on websites? They're not an icon; they contain a script which gathers info to uniquely identify your browser, then reports which page you visited back to the mothership. They create a ghost profile for you, then link it to your real identity if they ever get corroborating evidence (e.g. friend sends you a link to their FB page to your email, thus linking your email address with the ghost profile). And if your friend has tagged pictures they took of you, they know what you look like. And now with their app reporting your movements, they know where you live and work and like to hang out. All without you ever creating a Facebook account. I'm approaching the opinion that the only way to deal with them is to nuke them from orbit.
That's really the crux of the matter. Package theft just isn't common enough to be "worth it" for merchants (or police) to fight. It's cheaper for them to simply ship a replacement when it happens, than it is to come up with elaborate schemes to foil it, or even to require a signature and reschedule delivery if nobody is there to sign for the package.
One guy coming up with a contraption like this and posting a video so millions of victims can vicariously imagine revenge on the thief who wronged them, while there's no change in what merchants or police do, is probably the best way to handle this.
I'd like to see the United States Postal Inspection Service, a law-enforcement entity in its own right, expanded to cover these sorts of crimes even if the shipper is not the USPS, and for the crime of stealing packages to have the same penalties as exists for stealing mail.
Actually, I think he stumbled upon what might work to get the police involved. The device recorded its location via GPS and uploaded it in real time. In several cases, the thief took it to their home before opening it. That plus the video clearly showing the thief's face makes it pretty much an open and shut case if the police wanted to prosecute. (The glitter and fart spray being relegated to "encouraging" the thief to dispose of the contraption before they discover they've been tracked and recorded.) The whole thing is basically the package-equivalent of a bait car.
There are still places where people don't lock their doors and leave their keys in their cars in case a neighbor needs to borrow it in an emergency.
Unrelated, but don't do this with the newer car keys which unlock the doors by proximity ('keyless entry"). They can sense when they're inside the car rather than outside, and will not unlock the doors when you touch the handle from the outside (otherwise a mugger chasing you would be able to open the doors you just locked). Many of these cars will also auto-lock the doors after a certain period of time (it assumes you're inside getting ready to go somewhere). Resulting in the key being locked inside with no way to get in unless you have a spare key. And calling a locksmith to break in to these newer car locks is either futile or a lot more expensive.
Why was it wrong for Russia to try to influence the election in 2016? The reason I arrive at is because Russians aren't allowed to vote in our election, so it's wrong for them to try to influence it.
But by that same reasoning, isn't it also wrong for the two political parties to influence elections for Senators and Congresscritters by shifting money to candidate's campaign that has been raised outside the state or district the candidate is running in? After all, that's money donated by someone who can't vote in that election being used to try to influence it.
So if you carry this outrage over Russian interference to its logical conclusion, you end up with a ban on political parties' unrestricted use of donations. No using money raised in New York to try to influence a Congressional race in Arizona. Money raised in New York has to be used in New York. Only money raised in that Arizona congressional district can be used to influence the race there.
Somehow I suspect the political parties aren't going to see it that way. And their stance is going to be that it's wrong for other people to try to influence races they can't vote in, but it's OK for them to do it.
The whole thing only exists because California's right wing made it difficult to raise income taxes but the state needs money to fight the drought. So they come up with insane things to get around the rule that they can't just raise taxes when they need to.
Seriously, their taxes are like a one way ratchet. You can lower them with a simple majority but it takes a super majority to raise them
Um, the Democrats have more than a supermajority in both of California's legislative branches. 72.5% in the state senate (29 D,11 R). 75% in the state assembly (60 D, 20 R). And they hold the governorship Yet somehow in your mind, this proposed legislation is the right wing's fault?
The Republicans in Sacramento have zero political power. The Democrats could pass anything they want any time they want, even if every single Republican votes against it. If something doesn't pass, it's because a substantial number of Democrats also opposed it.
911 will already transfer callers to suicide intervention, plus they can handle all of the related emergencies that require additional immediate support
That is the problem. 911 is advertised as being for emergencies. People suffering suicidal depression rarely consider it to be an emergency. They consider it to be a personal problem, not rising to the level of an emergency which warrants involving other people. We could badly use a hotline that people know they can call if they're just depressed and want someone to talk to.
58,335 deaths by accidental poisoning (mostly drug overdoses - the other huge problem the country is facing)
44,965 deaths by suicide
40,327 deaths by motor vehicle accidents
34.673 deaths by falls
19,362 homicides (14,415 by gun)
You probably aren't aware of this because the media has been reticent in their duty in reporting facts to the populace, devoting too much air time on their pet issue (gun violence), They've mostly neglected the two issues (suicide and drug overdoses) which have grown over the last two decades to become several times larger than the number of gun homicides. Test it for yourself. Watch the news and count how many suicides, drug overdoses, motor vehicle accidents, and gun deaths they report. You'll find their coverage is skewed heavily towards reporting gun deaths.
The amount of concrete used in both nuclear plants and hydroelectric dams is massive. It dwarfs the pads for solar panels and wind turbines.
Actually I did the calculations on this a few years back. Per GWh of energy generated, wind turbines use roughly an order of magnitude more concrete (and steel) than nuclear plants. You have to understand that wind turbines very rarely operate at full capacity like a nuclear reactor does. The actual electricity production of nuclear plants averages about 90% of their nameplate capacity. For onshore wind it's about 25%. So to generate the same amount of power over the course of a year as a single 1 GW nuclear reactor requires about 2500 1.5 MW wind turbines (3.6 GW capacity). And the steel and concrete for that many turbines far exceeds the requirements for the single nuclear plant. It also drives up the maintenance cost for wind far above that for nuclear, even with all the regulations covering nuclear. (In fact most of the wind-related deaths are due to maintenance personnel falling from turbines.)
To get free shipping for items in Prime Pantry, you have to order more than $35 worth of stuff. Or pay $5.99 in shipping if you order less than $35 (even with Prime membership).
The story here seems to be that Amazon's employees who are supposed to categorize which items go into Prime Pantry are doing such a poor job, that they're letting some items slip into their regular delivery system.
You've managed to take a benefit a company offers to employees, and twisted it into a negative.. You're basically saying that in your opinion, no matter what a company does it's always wrong. It's wrong if they don't provide employees with health insurance, and it's wrong if they do. So either you've got a preconceived bias against companies (they're always wrong no matter what they do), or you've got an error in your reasoning.
What's going on is a misunderstanding of opportunity cost. There is no difference between these two scenarios:
Company pays you a salary of $x/mo, and provides you with $y/mo in health insurance. You quit your job so your salary drops to $0, and you have to pay $y/mo out of your savings to continue your health insurance (which I've done).
Company pays you a salary of $(x+y)/mo, but doesn't provide you with health insurance. You pay $y/mo for health insurance. You quit your job so your salary drops to $0, and you continue to pay $y/mo for your health insurance out of your savings.
Your error is in assuming that your salary would be the same if your company didn't provide health insurance. If they didn't offer health insurance, you'd have been less likely to accept the job, so they'd have had to pay you a higher salary to get you to accept the job. This failure to take opportunity cost into account results in you erroneously comparing two non-comparable scenarios (company pays $x/mo and provides $y/mo health insurance, vs company pays $x/mo), causing you to arrive at your erroneous conclusion (that quitting a job is harder if the job provides health care as a benefit, because you'd lose $(x+y) in salary and benefits, instead of just $x in salary).
Doesn't name the constellations. In fact it's difficult to even see the constellations on it. Try this chart from Sky and Telescope. The comet is currently between Taurus and the Pleiades. Most occasional stargazers can locate those.
Don't expect much though. It's currently at its peak magnitude of 3.9. Magnitude 6.0 is the dimmest you can see in dark skies, with most visible stars falling between -1.5 and +5. You're not going to see it with the naked eye from a city. Maybe a fuzzy blob with decent binoculars. The closest bright star is Aldebaran, which at magnitude 1 is about 15x brighter.
Bluetooth works OK for listening where timing is not a factor, but it introduces latency. My car seems to add about 300 ms of latency when receiving audio via Bluetooth. That makes it really annoying to play video on my phone with the sound piped to my car's speakers (so the kids or passengers can watch). If I use my tablet I can just plug the headphone jack into the car's aux port. But my newest phone eschewed the headphone jack. I didn't think it'd be a big deal because "I can just use Bluetooth." But I'm really missing the headphone jack.
Bluetooth uses the 2.4 GHz band. WiFi uses 2.4 GHz (802.11b, g, and n) or 5 GHz (n and ac). If you encounter this problem, all you have to do is connect to your router via the 5 GHz WiFi band.
I'm not even sure the problem is due to a shared antenna. The 2.4 GHz band is so crowded (a lot of wireless mice and keyboards use it too, and microwave ovens blast spread spectrum noise all over it when operating) that I see interference problems more often than I don't.
To be fair, this was one of the criticisms Apple laid out against Samsung's original Galaxy S when it was released. That it used a pentile RGBG display instead of RGB like the iPhone, so it's 800x480 display resolution supposedly wasn't really an advantage over the iPhone 3G's 480x320 resolution. Evidently some iPhone owners still remember that, and Apple is now being hoisted by their own petard.
Your eyes are much better at resolving green than they are at red or especially blue. Nearly every method of storing video or photos has taken advantage of this - the old NTSC broadcast TV standard, color film composition, JPEG compression, digital camera sensors, even the latest h.265 video codec. All of them stored red and especially blue at a lower resolution than they do green. So you've been looking at the equivalent of pentile images all your life and never noticed it. Unless you peep at the pixels with a magnifying glass, there's no reduction in image quality from using a lower blue and red subpixel resolution than green. The only exception I've seen is due to a long-lived MPEG bug from the 1990s which still occasionally crops up as striations in blocks of solid color, especially red, which might not have been visible at a higher red resolution.
Unfortunately it was nearly impossible to convince iPhone owners and reviewers who'd drunk Apple's kool-aid of this fact, and Samsung eventually relented and used RGB versions of its OLED displays on their newer phones. So I'll shed no tears that Apple's chickens are now coming home to roost.
Slashdot Mirror
In many states, employers are required to pay workers overtime after 8 hours in a day. So even if the employer wants to offer 4x10 hours, they're forced to stick to 8 hour days to avoid increasing their payroll costs for the same number of hours worked.
Facebook isn't the first iteration of this problem. It isn't even the second. Before Facebook was MySpace. Before MySpace was GeoCities. (Before GeoCities was AOL, but that more Internet access via a portal instead of TCP/IP on your computer). In each case the individual wanting to publish on the web was faced with two choices:
That's the fundamental problem. Getting updates from multiple sites is easy. It's the site setup, maintenance, and cleanup work if you get haced (that most people wouldn't have a clue how to do anyway) that's hard. It's a lot easier just to have someone else deal with all that for you. And if that someone else requires you to sell your soul^H^H^H^Hdata and personal info for their services, people start to think that's a pretty good deal.
This is why I've constantly railed against Open Source project managers and contributors who are dismissive or condescending towards user requests. If you don't make it easy for users (people who don't know how to program) to use your software, they will just use some other software which makes it easy for them. And Facebook, Google, Apple are more than happy to give them that easy user experience easy in exchange for the user's soul.
If you want Open Source to succeed, you have to make it easy for users, not just for programmers.
U.S. military spending is huge simply because the U.S. economy is huge. If you look at military spending as percent of GDP, the U.S. doesn't even make the top 20. It's slightly above the world average (3.1% vs 2.2%). And if you factor in that the U.S. is bound by the peace treaties ending WWII to provide for Japan's national defense, it's pretty much at the world average.
Comparing based on raw dollars is like comparing food budget of an apartment complex in first world vs the food budget of a single family in a developing nation. You're ignoring differences in population and economic productivity.
Communications satellites like this one go into geostationary orbit. That's an orbit with a radius of 42,164 km, for a circumference of 264,924 km. There are currently about 1800 satellites (and dead husks) in geostationary orbit, for an average spacing of 147 km between each satellite.
The space debris problem is primarily limited to low earth orbit (about 150-1000 km altitude). It takes a lot more energy to get up to geostationary orbit, so we don't put satellites there unless we absolutely need it to stay above a fixed longitude.
Plastic originates from oil, and has the chemical form (C2H4)n for polyethelene, C2H3-x for PVC and polysyrene. When we bury it in a landfill, each C there is carbon which has been sequestered back underground, not combusted with atmospheric oxygen to produce CO2. In that respect, its resistance to biodegradation is a good thing, since it prevents bacteria in the landfill from converting it into CH4 (methane) and CO2. In a landfill locked in the form of plastic, that carbon is well and truly sequestered.
Unfortunately, TFA does not make a distinction between what percentage of plastic ends up in landfills, and what percentage in the natural environment. I'm also curious if the incineration process is high enough in temperature to yield atomic carbon (soot), or if it converts the carbon into CO2. I'm guessing the latter since that yields more energy, helping defray the cost of incineration.
If you read the article you've linked carefully, those 10 rivers account for 93% of the plastic waste entering the oceans from rivers. But they only account for ~25% of all plastic waste entering the oceans. About 73% comes from sources other than rivers if I did my math right.
I'd agree with the analogy if tumblr had created all the content in the first place, content which made them famous on the web, then they decided to remove it from the web.
That's not the case here though. Users created the content, and that content was what made the site famous. Then the company unilaterally decided to pull the users' content off the web, which they're allowed to do since it's their servers hosting it. Verizon doesn't own that content though, the users who uploaded it to tumblr did. As such, Verizon doesn't have the right to selectively block archive.org from accessing that content. The copyright holder has control over distribution, not Verizon. So Verizon has no right to discriminate against who can view the artworks (unless the copyright holders ceded that right to them - I dunno what tumblr's TOS say).
So the more appropriate analogy here would be an art studio allowed people to hang their artwork on the walls of their building for the public to view. This became quite popular, making the building famous and a popular destination for tourists, and also making it quite valuable. Then suddenly the studio decides that it wants to remove some of that artwork (which it has the right to do since it's their building). Prior to the date of removal, the door is never locked. The public is still allowed to come in and view/make copies of the artwork. But when a photographer arrives to take photos of all the artwork to be removed, the studio blocks him (and only him) from entry.
While over-the-air bandwidth is bound by Shannon's limit, that only applies to shared channels. The MU-MIMO found on most 802.11ac implementations gets around this limitation by making the channels directional. It's basically a simplified form of phased array radar, where you can "point" the antenna via software rather than have to physically move it. For a visual analogy, 802.11a/b/g/n is like turning the room light on and off, and the device receive the light signal by measuring the overall brightness of the room. MIMO is like the sender shining a laser pointer at the receiver, and the receiver using a tube to reject light from any direction other than the sender's direction. Whereas the room light affects and interferes with all other light-based communication in the room (the channel is shared), the laser pointer only interferes if you happen to be in the same line as the sender to recipient. Since the information channel is no longer shared, the Shannon limit no longer applies, and everyone is able to use the full bandwidth of the airwaves simultaneously.
5G includes MIMO, enabling it to communicate with individual devices simultaneously over the same frequencies without interference. So going forward, I expect the Shannon limit to be less and less relevant to wireless communications.
As I've been saying, 5G doesn't really benefit you in the best-case scenarios people usually use for comparisons (nobody except you is using the cell tower for data). It benefits you in the worst-case scenario (lots of other people are competing with you for bandwidth to a cell tower).
Facebook has entered agreements with most if not all the major cellular carriers and phone manufacturers to pre-install the Facebook app on your phone. You can't uninstall it. You can disable it, but I've been fighting another preinstalled app called Facebook App Manager which you can't disable. It seems to be re-enabling the Facebook app (every week or so it's active again and has auto-updated to the latest version). I'd been putting off rooting the phone since it voids the warranty, but I think I'm going to have to punt the warranty and root just to kill stupid crap like this.
Facebook is well known for tracking you even if you don't have a Facebook account. Those little 'f' icons you see on websites? They're not an icon; they contain a script which gathers info to uniquely identify your browser, then reports which page you visited back to the mothership. They create a ghost profile for you, then link it to your real identity if they ever get corroborating evidence (e.g. friend sends you a link to their FB page to your email, thus linking your email address with the ghost profile). And if your friend has tagged pictures they took of you, they know what you look like. And now with their app reporting your movements, they know where you live and work and like to hang out. All without you ever creating a Facebook account. I'm approaching the opinion that the only way to deal with them is to nuke them from orbit.
They don't exist, but everyone wants to think they do.
That's really the crux of the matter. Package theft just isn't common enough to be "worth it" for merchants (or police) to fight. It's cheaper for them to simply ship a replacement when it happens, than it is to come up with elaborate schemes to foil it, or even to require a signature and reschedule delivery if nobody is there to sign for the package.
One guy coming up with a contraption like this and posting a video so millions of victims can vicariously imagine revenge on the thief who wronged them, while there's no change in what merchants or police do, is probably the best way to handle this.
Actually, I think he stumbled upon what might work to get the police involved. The device recorded its location via GPS and uploaded it in real time. In several cases, the thief took it to their home before opening it. That plus the video clearly showing the thief's face makes it pretty much an open and shut case if the police wanted to prosecute. (The glitter and fart spray being relegated to "encouraging" the thief to dispose of the contraption before they discover they've been tracked and recorded.) The whole thing is basically the package-equivalent of a bait car.
Unrelated, but don't do this with the newer car keys which unlock the doors by proximity ('keyless entry"). They can sense when they're inside the car rather than outside, and will not unlock the doors when you touch the handle from the outside (otherwise a mugger chasing you would be able to open the doors you just locked). Many of these cars will also auto-lock the doors after a certain period of time (it assumes you're inside getting ready to go somewhere). Resulting in the key being locked inside with no way to get in unless you have a spare key. And calling a locksmith to break in to these newer car locks is either futile or a lot more expensive.
https://www.civicx.com/threads/locked-my-keys-in-my-keyless-entry-vehicle-smh.19760/"
https://www.reddit.com/r/mazda3/comments/3cd8ax/locked_keys_in_car_keyless_fob_sitting_in_the/
https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/car-locked-fob-inside-what-do-you-do
Why was it wrong for Russia to try to influence the election in 2016? The reason I arrive at is because Russians aren't allowed to vote in our election, so it's wrong for them to try to influence it.
But by that same reasoning, isn't it also wrong for the two political parties to influence elections for Senators and Congresscritters by shifting money to candidate's campaign that has been raised outside the state or district the candidate is running in? After all, that's money donated by someone who can't vote in that election being used to try to influence it.
So if you carry this outrage over Russian interference to its logical conclusion, you end up with a ban on political parties' unrestricted use of donations. No using money raised in New York to try to influence a Congressional race in Arizona. Money raised in New York has to be used in New York. Only money raised in that Arizona congressional district can be used to influence the race there.
Somehow I suspect the political parties aren't going to see it that way. And their stance is going to be that it's wrong for other people to try to influence races they can't vote in, but it's OK for them to do it.
Um, the Democrats have more than a supermajority in both of California's legislative branches. 72.5% in the state senate (29 D,11 R). 75% in the state assembly (60 D, 20 R). And they hold the governorship Yet somehow in your mind, this proposed legislation is the right wing's fault?
The Republicans in Sacramento have zero political power. The Democrats could pass anything they want any time they want, even if every single Republican votes against it. If something doesn't pass, it's because a substantial number of Democrats also opposed it.
BTW, the drought ended in 2017.
That is the problem. 911 is advertised as being for emergencies. People suffering suicidal depression rarely consider it to be an emergency. They consider it to be a personal problem, not rising to the level of an emergency which warrants involving other people. We could badly use a hotline that people know they can call if they're just depressed and want someone to talk to.
And This Is Important. Aside from disease, suicide is the #2 cause of death in this country (Table 6).
You probably aren't aware of this because the media has been reticent in their duty in reporting facts to the populace, devoting too much air time on their pet issue (gun violence), They've mostly neglected the two issues (suicide and drug overdoses) which have grown over the last two decades to become several times larger than the number of gun homicides. Test it for yourself. Watch the news and count how many suicides, drug overdoses, motor vehicle accidents, and gun deaths they report. You'll find their coverage is skewed heavily towards reporting gun deaths.
Actually I did the calculations on this a few years back. Per GWh of energy generated, wind turbines use roughly an order of magnitude more concrete (and steel) than nuclear plants. You have to understand that wind turbines very rarely operate at full capacity like a nuclear reactor does. The actual electricity production of nuclear plants averages about 90% of their nameplate capacity. For onshore wind it's about 25%. So to generate the same amount of power over the course of a year as a single 1 GW nuclear reactor requires about 2500 1.5 MW wind turbines (3.6 GW capacity). And the steel and concrete for that many turbines far exceeds the requirements for the single nuclear plant. It also drives up the maintenance cost for wind far above that for nuclear, even with all the regulations covering nuclear. (In fact most of the wind-related deaths are due to maintenance personnel falling from turbines.)
To get free shipping for items in Prime Pantry, you have to order more than $35 worth of stuff. Or pay $5.99 in shipping if you order less than $35 (even with Prime membership).
The story here seems to be that Amazon's employees who are supposed to categorize which items go into Prime Pantry are doing such a poor job, that they're letting some items slip into their regular delivery system.
What's going on is a misunderstanding of opportunity cost. There is no difference between these two scenarios:
Your error is in assuming that your salary would be the same if your company didn't provide health insurance. If they didn't offer health insurance, you'd have been less likely to accept the job, so they'd have had to pay you a higher salary to get you to accept the job. This failure to take opportunity cost into account results in you erroneously comparing two non-comparable scenarios (company pays $x/mo and provides $y/mo health insurance, vs company pays $x/mo), causing you to arrive at your erroneous conclusion (that quitting a job is harder if the job provides health care as a benefit, because you'd lose $(x+y) in salary and benefits, instead of just $x in salary).
Doesn't name the constellations. In fact it's difficult to even see the constellations on it. Try this chart from Sky and Telescope. The comet is currently between Taurus and the Pleiades. Most occasional stargazers can locate those.
Don't expect much though. It's currently at its peak magnitude of 3.9. Magnitude 6.0 is the dimmest you can see in dark skies, with most visible stars falling between -1.5 and +5. You're not going to see it with the naked eye from a city. Maybe a fuzzy blob with decent binoculars. The closest bright star is Aldebaran, which at magnitude 1 is about 15x brighter.
Bluetooth works OK for listening where timing is not a factor, but it introduces latency. My car seems to add about 300 ms of latency when receiving audio via Bluetooth. That makes it really annoying to play video on my phone with the sound piped to my car's speakers (so the kids or passengers can watch). If I use my tablet I can just plug the headphone jack into the car's aux port. But my newest phone eschewed the headphone jack. I didn't think it'd be a big deal because "I can just use Bluetooth." But I'm really missing the headphone jack.
Bluetooth uses the 2.4 GHz band. WiFi uses 2.4 GHz (802.11b, g, and n) or 5 GHz (n and ac). If you encounter this problem, all you have to do is connect to your router via the 5 GHz WiFi band.
I'm not even sure the problem is due to a shared antenna. The 2.4 GHz band is so crowded (a lot of wireless mice and keyboards use it too, and microwave ovens blast spread spectrum noise all over it when operating) that I see interference problems more often than I don't.
To be fair, this was one of the criticisms Apple laid out against Samsung's original Galaxy S when it was released. That it used a pentile RGBG display instead of RGB like the iPhone, so it's 800x480 display resolution supposedly wasn't really an advantage over the iPhone 3G's 480x320 resolution. Evidently some iPhone owners still remember that, and Apple is now being hoisted by their own petard.
Your eyes are much better at resolving green than they are at red or especially blue. Nearly every method of storing video or photos has taken advantage of this - the old NTSC broadcast TV standard, color film composition, JPEG compression, digital camera sensors, even the latest h.265 video codec. All of them stored red and especially blue at a lower resolution than they do green. So you've been looking at the equivalent of pentile images all your life and never noticed it. Unless you peep at the pixels with a magnifying glass, there's no reduction in image quality from using a lower blue and red subpixel resolution than green. The only exception I've seen is due to a long-lived MPEG bug from the 1990s which still occasionally crops up as striations in blocks of solid color, especially red, which might not have been visible at a higher red resolution.
Unfortunately it was nearly impossible to convince iPhone owners and reviewers who'd drunk Apple's kool-aid of this fact, and Samsung eventually relented and used RGB versions of its OLED displays on their newer phones. So I'll shed no tears that Apple's chickens are now coming home to roost.
When you realize something won't fight back, your immediate reaction is to try to abuse the hell out of it.
Too much collaboration == endless meetings.