The difference between then and now, there and here, is our system of government. If you think Obama got cock-blocked at every turn, should Trump win, they'll do the same to him. They'll do the same to Billary, too.
Congress' approval rating is 11%. It can go lower. Honestly, I think it probably will. It's uncompromising ideology that is at the root of most dissatisfaction with Congress. At best, it's the fault of that other fucking party that keeps getting in the way. Eventually it will get low enough that Americans will start to accept the necessity of executive orders just to enable the proper functioning of government. Maybe this will happen under the next president; maybe not. When it happens, there will be no need for an Enabling Act.
You mean cycle through the one single VIN stencilled into the windscreen of your mortal enemy's Nissan Leaf, right? I think even the most inept developer of all time should be able to write an algorithm that's better than O(n)...
I suspect that it's personal for Tim Cook as well. As a homosexual, you would not have to go back very far into the history of the USA and every other western nation to find government agents who would have used messages that are on his phone right now to implicate him in crimes. There are still many, many nations in the world who, if they had access to Tim Cook's current personal messages today, could convict him of serious crimes that would carry serious sentences that would deprive him of liberty and security of his person.
That's a good summary, but you've missed a key part that goes to the margin of error: they studied 1.1 million transactions, which is a lot of transactions. The article is silent about how many transactions were for used items and how many were for new; however, a 3% difference in price for used items is probably significant, and the 20% difference is nearly certainly significant.
For an even shorter summary, this study says that if you are buying something new on eBay you should try to buy it from a woman. You will save 20 cents on the dollar.
The authors are not really blaming anyone for anything - certainly not "Mansellers and their unfair use of words". They have identified a few things that are statistically significant, and really very interesting.
First, people are actually not bad at guessing the gender of eBay sellers based on their names, the other items they sell, and maybe some other stuff (the article does not provide an exhaustive list). Were you aware of that? I have used eBay for well over a decade and I don't think I've ever guessed a seller's gender. For me, this study opened my mind to the idea that maybe I have done exactly that without noticing.
Second, women get 3% less for a used item than men. This is a small amount, but it's statistically significant. They studied 1.1 million transactions. Though it's not clear what fraction were for used merchandise, even if it was only 1% of items studied, that kind of difference in price is significant.
Third, women get 20% less for a new item than men. That is eyebrow-raising significant.
Fourth, they analyzed the language used by men and women to describe the products they had for sale systematically. It looks like they counted flattering words (which may or may not be a great way to judge if an item is well- or poorly-described). They could not explain the difference in selling price based on that - they concluded that women got 19% less than men for new items after correcting for the difference they could measure in the descriptions. This has led the authors to discard the hypothesis that men and women get different prices because of the way they describe their wares, contrary to what you suggest. They do suggest that buyers may assume that women are more honest in their description of used items; however, this conjecture is made without any supporting evidence.
Let me try to help you understand this. They are saying that buyers on eBay tend to pay less for items that are sold by women. The authors are silent on whether the buyers also think themselves pigs for doing it - how would you ever measure that? - but I doubt that many buyers do hold themselves in such low regard. If you want to take something practical from this study, here's an interesting life hack: consciously try to determine the gender of eBay sellers and only bid on auction items that you think are sold by women, especially for new stuff. According to this study, on average you will pay a lower price.
I'll leave it between you and your own conscience about whether it makes you a pig to base a purchase decision based on the seller's gender.
...it is very close to random guessing's expected error level.
It is not. It's less than one-third the expected error level from guessing.
Imagine this experiment: I flip a coin behind a curtain 100 times, and I ask you each time to tell me if it's heads or tails. If you say that you are unable to tell for 35 of the tosses, then I would expect you to correctly tell me if it is heads or tails 32 or 33 times and incorrectly tell me the coin's state 32 or 33 times. If, however, you correctly tell me the state of the coin 56 times and only blow it 9 times, I will want to know what method you are using to deduce the state of the coin behind the curtain. I will emphatically not assume that you are guessing.
First, imagine this: the price of a self-driving car will be too high to allow it to sit idle in your garage. You will never, ever own a self-driving car. You can choose to buy a car that you drive yourself, or you can choose to consume Transportation-as-a-Service (TaaS). Uber will provide it. Google will provide it. Maybe car manufacturers will provide it. You can answer all your questions yourself if you replace "self-driving car" with "taxi."
TaaS will be in competition with car ownership, so providers will have to comfort users and provide a better experience in order to compete. For what it's worth, it is not a high standard to provide a better experience than insuring, maintaining, fuelling, and driving a car. One specific way that they can provide a better experience is by dealing with all the annoyances that you mention, and more.
Everything that you say is correct; however, it's a risky proposition for the Republican party to focus on it, because it papers over the dire straits in which the party finds itself.
I'm not American, so this is an outsider's perspective. I think that the Republican party does focus on the truth that Bush won the election over Gore and that he won it fare-and-square. In doing that, they ignore the more salient truth: since 1992, the Republican party has won the popular vote for president exactly once.
That is a sign of a party out-of-step with the country they want to govern.
In fact when I get to the front of the queue I do often pull out, against the "Give Way" sign, in a way that does make the through traffic slow a bit. Who is breaking the rules then, me or them?
This is not true. There are Roman roads that have been maintained as roads in Great Britain for about 2,000 years (sometimes well maintained, sometimes poorly maintained). Many were abandoned, but not all.
TFA refers to Pu238, which is quite active. It has a half life of about 88 years. It is an energetic alpha emitter, which is not dangerous outside the body because the skin absorbs the emission and you can wash Pu238 off pretty easily. However, once it's inside you, virtually all of the alpha emissions will be absorbed by your body unless/until you can excrete it. A good fraction of any amount ingested will eventually emit energetic radiation that you will absorb. A disaster could be bad.
Having said all that, including Pu238 in a spacecraft is a problem wehavesolvedbefore, so it's not all that crazy.
The appliance-type cookers can have a glass lid, and the pot-on-the-stove versions (always?) have a metal lid. I think that the appliance-type ones have all the pressure release valves and knobs in the pot rather than the lid which puts a glass top in play. I'm not sure about that because I've never owned an appliance-type cooker. They aren't as versatile because you can't quickly depressurize by using cold water on the lid or base.
Good point. You are a genius. Chevrolet should have added these features in 2006. That way, they wouldn't be stupidly adding them to a brand new car. Wait, what?
To be a bit more charitable, you can find out where something is through the process of enumerating all the places where it is not. This could take a while.
Including water, a SLOWPOKE reactor weighs on the order of 100 tonnes. If you could harvest water on Mars, you could probably land one on the surface with existing vehicles.
Even with water, it could be in play to get that reactor to low earth orbit in one launch and later attach a transfer vehicle in orbit. That reactor is in the ~1 MWe range.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference between then and now, there and here, is our system of government. If you think Obama got cock-blocked at every turn, should Trump win, they'll do the same to him. They'll do the same to Billary, too.
Congress' approval rating is 11%. It can go lower. Honestly, I think it probably will. It's uncompromising ideology that is at the root of most dissatisfaction with Congress. At best, it's the fault of that other fucking party that keeps getting in the way. Eventually it will get low enough that Americans will start to accept the necessity of executive orders just to enable the proper functioning of government. Maybe this will happen under the next president; maybe not. When it happens, there will be no need for an Enabling Act.
Yes.
You win. That's way funnier than mine.
You mean cycle through the one single VIN stencilled into the windscreen of your mortal enemy's Nissan Leaf, right? I think even the most inept developer of all time should be able to write an algorithm that's better than O(n)...
I suspect that it's personal for Tim Cook as well. As a homosexual, you would not have to go back very far into the history of the USA and every other western nation to find government agents who would have used messages that are on his phone right now to implicate him in crimes. There are still many, many nations in the world who, if they had access to Tim Cook's current personal messages today, could convict him of serious crimes that would carry serious sentences that would deprive him of liberty and security of his person.
That's a good summary, but you've missed a key part that goes to the margin of error: they studied 1.1 million transactions, which is a lot of transactions. The article is silent about how many transactions were for used items and how many were for new; however, a 3% difference in price for used items is probably significant, and the 20% difference is nearly certainly significant.
For an even shorter summary, this study says that if you are buying something new on eBay you should try to buy it from a woman. You will save 20 cents on the dollar.
The authors are not really blaming anyone for anything - certainly not "Mansellers and their unfair use of words". They have identified a few things that are statistically significant, and really very interesting.
First, people are actually not bad at guessing the gender of eBay sellers based on their names, the other items they sell, and maybe some other stuff (the article does not provide an exhaustive list). Were you aware of that? I have used eBay for well over a decade and I don't think I've ever guessed a seller's gender. For me, this study opened my mind to the idea that maybe I have done exactly that without noticing.
Second, women get 3% less for a used item than men. This is a small amount, but it's statistically significant. They studied 1.1 million transactions. Though it's not clear what fraction were for used merchandise, even if it was only 1% of items studied, that kind of difference in price is significant.
Third, women get 20% less for a new item than men. That is eyebrow-raising significant.
Fourth, they analyzed the language used by men and women to describe the products they had for sale systematically. It looks like they counted flattering words (which may or may not be a great way to judge if an item is well- or poorly-described). They could not explain the difference in selling price based on that - they concluded that women got 19% less than men for new items after correcting for the difference they could measure in the descriptions. This has led the authors to discard the hypothesis that men and women get different prices because of the way they describe their wares, contrary to what you suggest. They do suggest that buyers may assume that women are more honest in their description of used items; however, this conjecture is made without any supporting evidence.
Let me try to help you understand this. They are saying that buyers on eBay tend to pay less for items that are sold by women. The authors are silent on whether the buyers also think themselves pigs for doing it - how would you ever measure that? - but I doubt that many buyers do hold themselves in such low regard. If you want to take something practical from this study, here's an interesting life hack: consciously try to determine the gender of eBay sellers and only bid on auction items that you think are sold by women, especially for new stuff. According to this study, on average you will pay a lower price.
I'll leave it between you and your own conscience about whether it makes you a pig to base a purchase decision based on the seller's gender.
...it is very close to random guessing's expected error level.
It is not. It's less than one-third the expected error level from guessing.
Imagine this experiment: I flip a coin behind a curtain 100 times, and I ask you each time to tell me if it's heads or tails. If you say that you are unable to tell for 35 of the tosses, then I would expect you to correctly tell me if it is heads or tails 32 or 33 times and incorrectly tell me the coin's state 32 or 33 times. If, however, you correctly tell me the state of the coin 56 times and only blow it 9 times, I will want to know what method you are using to deduce the state of the coin behind the curtain. I will emphatically not assume that you are guessing.
The history of technology is awash in the tears of engineers who tried to make people wear something that looks as hideous as a VR headset.
If some driver getting themselves lost is a news story, then GPS must be incredibly good at giving correct directions.
First, imagine this: the price of a self-driving car will be too high to allow it to sit idle in your garage. You will never, ever own a self-driving car. You can choose to buy a car that you drive yourself, or you can choose to consume Transportation-as-a-Service (TaaS). Uber will provide it. Google will provide it. Maybe car manufacturers will provide it. You can answer all your questions yourself if you replace "self-driving car" with "taxi."
TaaS will be in competition with car ownership, so providers will have to comfort users and provide a better experience in order to compete. For what it's worth, it is not a high standard to provide a better experience than insuring, maintaining, fuelling, and driving a car. One specific way that they can provide a better experience is by dealing with all the annoyances that you mention, and more.
Everything that you say is correct; however, it's a risky proposition for the Republican party to focus on it, because it papers over the dire straits in which the party finds itself.
I'm not American, so this is an outsider's perspective. I think that the Republican party does focus on the truth that Bush won the election over Gore and that he won it fare-and-square. In doing that, they ignore the more salient truth: since 1992, the Republican party has won the popular vote for president exactly once.
That is a sign of a party out-of-step with the country they want to govern.
self-compilation is a parlor trick.
Self-interpretation is a better one.
In fact when I get to the front of the queue I do often pull out, against the "Give Way" sign, in a way that does make the through traffic slow a bit. Who is breaking the rules then, me or them?
Both.
This is a good point. You will never find a more cliché-ridden text than a Shakespeare play. The only thing is - he wrote the clichés.
The real question is why someone could ever pay a flat fee for an infinite resource. It was obvious that could never last.
Bus pass.
210Po is probably more likely than 90Sr because of the energy density problem they are going to need to solve.
How are all these 5G devices going to fit into the same rf spectrum?
Shorter range. More towers.
...an entire Earth atmosphere of pressure every 30 meters!
10 meters.
This is not true. There are Roman roads that have been maintained as roads in Great Britain for about 2,000 years (sometimes well maintained, sometimes poorly maintained). Many were abandoned, but not all.
the 24,000 [year] half life
TFA refers to Pu238, which is quite active. It has a half life of about 88 years. It is an energetic alpha emitter, which is not dangerous outside the body because the skin absorbs the emission and you can wash Pu238 off pretty easily. However, once it's inside you, virtually all of the alpha emissions will be absorbed by your body unless/until you can excrete it. A good fraction of any amount ingested will eventually emit energetic radiation that you will absorb. A disaster could be bad.
Having said all that, including Pu238 in a spacecraft is a problem we have solved before, so it's not all that crazy.
The appliance-type cookers can have a glass lid, and the pot-on-the-stove versions (always?) have a metal lid. I think that the appliance-type ones have all the pressure release valves and knobs in the pot rather than the lid which puts a glass top in play. I'm not sure about that because I've never owned an appliance-type cooker. They aren't as versatile because you can't quickly depressurize by using cold water on the lid or base.
Good point. You are a genius. Chevrolet should have added these features in 2006. That way, they wouldn't be stupidly adding them to a brand new car. Wait, what?
To be a bit more charitable, you can find out where something is through the process of enumerating all the places where it is not. This could take a while.
Including water, a SLOWPOKE reactor weighs on the order of 100 tonnes. If you could harvest water on Mars, you could probably land one on the surface with existing vehicles.
Even with water, it could be in play to get that reactor to low earth orbit in one launch and later attach a transfer vehicle in orbit. That reactor is in the ~1 MWe range.