I blame it on the editor. What, you don’t have one? Neither does the paper, apparently.
The real answer is it’s a quote. It may be an inaccurate quote, but it’s still a quote. And people used to expect better from professionals, even professional lawmakers, like the ones in this story.
FYI “endemic” and “on its way out” do not mean the same thing.
My wife and a friend were planning on going to the Mall of America before Trump gained power. We said Fuck that and they went to West Edmonton Mall. Similar vibes, got to go on rides, etc., and not in America!
We are also taught to be more fearful through media and our politicians, because scared people are more than willing to give up all kinds of rights. In spite of violent crime and car deaths going down, people are more worried about those things than before. The same holds true for child abductions. The rate of stranger abductions has gone down, but the fear of it happening has gone up.
I’m not saying these things aren’t problems or shouldn’t be addressed, but they are still less of a risk than previously.
Not a fan of coffee, but I’m very careful about the amount of caffeine I take. This gives me fewer negative effects, lower tolerance, and a better kick if I’m feeling drowsy and turn to caffeine to solve that problem.
A proper amount of sleep is the better way, but I have a really hard time falling asleep before 9 and need to wake up at 5.
That guy could sell that mod. New image/model and good to go.
That’s who I sent my email to.
There is a difference between confidence and expectation and faith. The scientific method has 5 steps.
Yes, as a general rule, scientists believe a certain outcome will occur. This isn’t faith, though, this is an expectation based on their knowledge and the research they’ve done to design the experiment. They then go on to ignore their beliefs and test it anyway. They do this because they don’t operate on faith, they operate on proof. And if the outcome isn’t something they expect, which has certainly happened, they then try to find out why, design new experiments, and perform further studies until they have confidence that they have a good understanding of what they’re studying.
If they were operating on faith, they could skip all those steps and just go on what they believe, like with Aristotle believing women had fewer teeth. This leads into other related components of the scientific method: verification and repeatability. A good experiment can be repeated by another scientist and get the same results. And why would they repeat the test? Certainly not due to faith!
I think what he said about startups is more pr less true. Of course, with startups you’re putting in a lot of work to break into or create a new market, and you get a percentage of that company, too. It certainly isn’t for everyone, and most people don’t want to do it for their whole career. And expecting that kind of attitude from a regular employee is simply ridiculous.
So stick it up in the post!
I was bringing a counterpoint on why spoilers can be good, but (incorrectly) edited it based on another comment saying it was inaccurate. Now, i would have read the spoiler anyway…
I was told I should watch the show, now I really want to watch the show. Even if what you they said is wrong.
Upvotes for admitting you were wrong and not removing it. Being wrong isn’t a big deal. Not being able to own up to it or hiding it really is.
Pretty sure I played that game…
The hat needs to be more pointy and more straight.
The question is, is it bigger, or does it last longer, than 100 kW worth of solar panels? There are a number of places on the moon that are remarkably suitable for solar power.
Yeah, anyone who thought this was something that could change course in six months is just delusional. It’s going to hurt, but actually having less reliance on a single trading partner is good for national security.
The problem is, have you ever noticed how much hotter you are in a parking lot on a warm day than when you are in a park? Well, now those events are happening on a parking lot and not a park. Furniture can be designed to work on turf, or temporary fixtures could be put in place to mitigate the drawbacks of furniture on lawns, but the absorbed and reflected heat will be hard to get rid of. Hopefully this area is small enough to not have a big impact on the temperature there.
I honestly don’t think it looks bad, but I suspect it’s more for Trump to put his stamp on it than anything else, and to erase the efforts of others before him. And I suspect it will be more uncomfortable than it was before.
And also, we have no efficient way to produce hydrogen…that doesn’t start with hydrocarbons. Storage is also an issue. At that point it isn’t any better than batteries, and allows us to “transition” from fossil fuels with this intermediate step, like with methane.