Not true. An ovum has a protective membrane called the zona pellucida. Sperm bind to the zona pellucida in a process known as sperm binding. This triggers a chemical reaction by enzymes to digest the membrane and allow the sperm to tunnel toward the egg’s plasma membrane.
If not enough sperm reach the ovum, this reaction doesn't happen, and none can penetrate.
So making phones more available to inmates would solve the issue.
Partially yes. Illegal cell phones are a bad solution to the problem of social alienation. But they are better than NO solution, and turning them off while the larger problems with our prisons haven't been fixed should NOT happen.
America's prison system is completely dysfunctional. We spend far more than any other country on prisons. Per capita, America imprisons more than four times as many people as China, Russia, or Iran. Yet we have far higher recidivism rates. Our prisons are factories for crime, and the people running them are actually incentivized to make them worse.
Even within the US there are dramatic differences, with the states spending the most having the worst outcomes. This cell phone jamming is just more knee jerk "get tough" nonsense that has been an unmitigated failure.
Let's fix the prison phone systems, so any prison who has not abused the privilege can have unlimited access to phones and internet. Once that is in place, sure, ban the cellphones.
I realise you're trying to be sarcastic, but you're correct. In the per-capita GDP rankings, the UK is 25th at $43,620, China is 78th at $16,624 (2017 IMF numbers). The USA is 11th at $59,495.
The east coast cities where the manufacturing is done are not poor. Shanghai and Shenzhen have per capita GDP over $30k, about the level of Italy.
Actually, there is. The prisons make it difficult for inmates and families to use the legal phone system.
The charges are exorbitant, and the hours and rules are burdensome.
The phones are usually controlled by a for-profit contractor, looking to squeeze out every cent they can.
The contractors, prison system, and guards unions actually benefit from increased recidivism that is strongly correlated with weaker bonds between inmates and their families.
Prisons are prisons.
Most inmates will eventually be released. They may even be your neighbors someday. So social alienation may not be the best policy.
They would create wealth for the owners of the machines.
You seem to think that our economy is based on "making stuff". But manufacturing is only 12% of the economy.
The most valuable companies in the world do no manufacturing.
If suddenly, machines could make everything we currently make, there would be little change in our economy. The biggest effect would be the fall of the price of manufactured goods relative to services, raising the effective wages of the 80% of people who work in the service economy.
Replacing service workers with machines is much harder, and is a long way off. It basically would require general-AI, which would so profoundly change our society that worrying about "jobs" is silly.
Colleges cannot afford a two tier level of instruction and research.
A two tier system costs less, and colleges that have adopted that model have mostly done so to save money. The improvement in teaching quality has been a side effect.
What colleges can't afford is to pay a world class researcher to teach introductory freshman courses.
College teaching is not broken and does not need fixing.
The cost of college has skyrocketed, student debt has soared, and graduates are not prepared for the job market.
Our current system of higher education is broken, and absolutely needs fixing.
What does need fixing is the insanity of administrators who look at student results and blame the faculty for them.
The bad results are happening broadly, so it clearly is not the fault of a few faculty. It is the "system" that needs to be fixed.
Costs need to be reined in. Students need to be counseled so they have realistic plans and expectations. We need to change our values so that completing a trade school education in welding or plumbing is at least as socially prestigious as a degree in journalism.
Separate research/publication and teaching as distinct abilities and reward each for what they are.
That would be a good start. My best college courses were taught by non-tenure-track lecturers. The worst instructors were old professors who wanted to be doing something else, and whose time was way more expensive than the lecturer.
Professors should do research and teach graduate seminars. Undergrad classes should be taught by professional instructors who know how to teach.
But colleges can also make much more use of technology. They could use online instruction for many of the lectures, and only meet in-class once per week, or even less, to focus on applying what was learned in the lectures, much like the flipped classroom model used in some high schools.
Plenty were quick to dismiss the prior plastic trap with quips and I-told-you-sos
We didn't say it wouldn't work. What we said is that it is IDIOTIC even if it does "work".
Most of the plastic in the Pacific Gyre comes from one country (China) and most of that comes from one river (Changjiang / Yangtze).
Recovering the plastic at the mouth of the river, where it is thousands of times more concentrated, and still in the form of bottles and bags rather than microparticles, would be infinitely more sensible.
The two states that cause the most problems for the US. Fuck 'em.
How so?
By paying more than their fair share of federal taxes, thus funding oppression of red-state farmers who just want the government to keep their damn hands off their crop subsidy checks.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL, all it takes is ONE to reach the egg.
Not true. An ovum has a protective membrane called the zona pellucida. Sperm bind to the zona pellucida in a process known as sperm binding. This triggers a chemical reaction by enzymes to digest the membrane and allow the sperm to tunnel toward the egg’s plasma membrane.
If not enough sperm reach the ovum, this reaction doesn't happen, and none can penetrate.
One is not enough. It is a group effort.
I look at teachers as a canary test. ... They're living paycheck to paycheck, can barely afford to live in the region
The average high school teacher's salary in NY is $83,360.
If both spouses teach, their combined income is $166,720.
The average household income in NY is $64,894.
Teacher salary by state
If companies can't sell data about you, they won't bother to collect it.
Not true. Most of the data collected is not sold. It is used directly by the companies collecting it.
Google does not sell data. They use the data to place ads on behalf of their clients. They do not give the clients access to the data.
So making phones more available to inmates would solve the issue.
Partially yes. Illegal cell phones are a bad solution to the problem of social alienation. But they are better than NO solution, and turning them off while the larger problems with our prisons haven't been fixed should NOT happen.
America's prison system is completely dysfunctional. We spend far more than any other country on prisons. Per capita, America imprisons more than four times as many people as China, Russia, or Iran. Yet we have far higher recidivism rates. Our prisons are factories for crime, and the people running them are actually incentivized to make them worse.
Even within the US there are dramatic differences, with the states spending the most having the worst outcomes. This cell phone jamming is just more knee jerk "get tough" nonsense that has been an unmitigated failure.
Let's fix the prison phone systems, so any prison who has not abused the privilege can have unlimited access to phones and internet. Once that is in place, sure, ban the cellphones.
A good solution would be user reviews.
After the date, you can leave a review, rating the other person on a scale of 1 to 5 stars for different criteria, as well as a text description.
This can prevent others from being mislead, and encourage more truth in advertising.
You may have been among the 1% that used a contraband phone for positive purposes but the rest of the crew were mostly committing crimes with them
Not true. Most inmates use cell phones to keep in touch with their families and friends.
running gangs, giving orders for whatever, all sorts of things.
Do you really believe that 99% of prison inmates are Mafia kingpins and druglords?
Oh? Then cite 5 comprehensive studies saying so.
Here you go:
1. Lowering recidivism through family communication
2. The family and recidivism
3. Family ties during imprisonment
4. The effect of family visits on inmates
5. Rethinking recidivism: A communication approach
I realise you're trying to be sarcastic, but you're correct. In the per-capita GDP rankings, the UK is 25th at $43,620, China is 78th at $16,624 (2017 IMF numbers). The USA is 11th at $59,495.
The east coast cities where the manufacturing is done are not poor. Shanghai and Shenzhen have per capita GDP over $30k, about the level of Italy.
You don't deploy technology to address a people issue.
Why not? People are notoriously hard to change. Deploying tech is almost always a better solution.
Um... Wouldn't that need three towers? :-)
No. You could put multiple antennas on one tower. You don't need much spatial separation.
There is virtually zero downside here.
Actually, there is. The prisons make it difficult for inmates and families to use the legal phone system.
The charges are exorbitant, and the hours and rules are burdensome.
The phones are usually controlled by a for-profit contractor, looking to squeeze out every cent they can.
The contractors, prison system, and guards unions actually benefit from increased recidivism that is strongly correlated with weaker bonds between inmates and their families.
Prisons are prisons.
Most inmates will eventually be released. They may even be your neighbors someday. So social alienation may not be the best policy.
I suspect that the old practice of wealthy families employing full-time household servants will make a significant comeback
I suspect that household chores and cleaning will be automated. It is an enormous market, and there are already plenty of people working on it.
They would create wealth for the owners of the machines.
You seem to think that our economy is based on "making stuff". But manufacturing is only 12% of the economy.
The most valuable companies in the world do no manufacturing.
If suddenly, machines could make everything we currently make, there would be little change in our economy. The biggest effect would be the fall of the price of manufactured goods relative to services, raising the effective wages of the 80% of people who work in the service economy.
Replacing service workers with machines is much harder, and is a long way off. It basically would require general-AI, which would so profoundly change our society that worrying about "jobs" is silly.
On odd days we see stories about how civilization is going to collapse because robots will steal all the jobs.
On even days we see stories about how there there won't be enough workers to support the retiring boomers.
The only thing certain is that civilization is going to end. We just can't agree on the reason.
Well we are at it, we also need to resolve how to pronouce "lib", "bin", "char", and "vi".
"vi" is the worst. I have heard it pronounced "vee-eye", "vee", "vie" (like "pie"), and "six".
Now if they can just find gainful employment with that communications degree.
Not a problem. They can just live off UBI.
Colleges cannot afford a two tier level of instruction and research.
A two tier system costs less, and colleges that have adopted that model have mostly done so to save money. The improvement in teaching quality has been a side effect.
What colleges can't afford is to pay a world class researcher to teach introductory freshman courses.
College teaching is not broken and does not need fixing.
The cost of college has skyrocketed, student debt has soared, and graduates are not prepared for the job market.
Our current system of higher education is broken, and absolutely needs fixing.
What does need fixing is the insanity of administrators who look at student results and blame the faculty for them.
The bad results are happening broadly, so it clearly is not the fault of a few faculty. It is the "system" that needs to be fixed.
Costs need to be reined in. Students need to be counseled so they have realistic plans and expectations. We need to change our values so that completing a trade school education in welding or plumbing is at least as socially prestigious as a degree in journalism.
unfortunately many of that half are not pursuing degrees that lend themselves to financial solvency or paying back that 100 K loan.
Once AOC is elected president, all the student loans will be forgiven. Problem solved.
Separate research/publication and teaching as distinct abilities and reward each for what they are.
That would be a good start. My best college courses were taught by non-tenure-track lecturers. The worst instructors were old professors who wanted to be doing something else, and whose time was way more expensive than the lecturer.
Professors should do research and teach graduate seminars. Undergrad classes should be taught by professional instructors who know how to teach.
But colleges can also make much more use of technology. They could use online instruction for many of the lectures, and only meet in-class once per week, or even less, to focus on applying what was learned in the lectures, much like the flipped classroom model used in some high schools.
I rented a primitive cabin in NH this winter where there was no cell service within 10 miles. We had no power, plumbing - just a wood stove.
I hope you at least had cable Internet, and didn't have to rely on DSL. That would be rough.
Add to it that what you think is trivial is a goldmine for others.
Why should I care? What bad thing is going to happen to me if "they" know where I buy my groceries?
Plenty were quick to dismiss the prior plastic trap with quips and I-told-you-sos
We didn't say it wouldn't work. What we said is that it is IDIOTIC even if it does "work".
Most of the plastic in the Pacific Gyre comes from one country (China) and most of that comes from one river (Changjiang / Yangtze).
Recovering the plastic at the mouth of the river, where it is thousands of times more concentrated, and still in the form of bottles and bags rather than microparticles, would be infinitely more sensible.
The two states that cause the most problems for the US. Fuck 'em.
How so?
By paying more than their fair share of federal taxes, thus funding oppression of red-state farmers who just want the government to keep their damn hands off their crop subsidy checks.
No it's not kinda shit, it's really just a naked tax grab.
Exactly. But we can stand up for our rights and FIGHT BACK by reusing a fabric sack.