Thank you for your explanation! My head hurts but I think it's worth it.
nymwit
joined 2 years ago
I don't disagree with your logic in general, but Trump isn't a boogeyman. A boogeyman isn't real. A boogeyman can't hurt you. We all saw how Trump ran things. It's not an imagined threat.
What would it take to be comfortable voting FOR someone and not AGAINST the other one? Easy: ranked choice voting.
I guess I don't understand. Can you elaborate how that fits the meaning? wikipedia: "Historically, begging the question refers to a fault in a dialectical argument in which the speaker assumes some premise that has not been demonstrated to be true. In modern usage, it has come to refer to an argument in which the premises assume the conclusion without supporting it."
Watch out on those terms and conditions. Before long you'll have to pay more to unlock an ad free vision experience that was previously ad free. Or maybe their licensing deal with Pantone or dolby vision will lapse and your "only licensed" capabilities will go away. Or maybe your one eye just veers off and focuses on any nearby advertisement that's part of the manufacturer's partner program and you literally could not take your eye off it? Non-partner brands are blurry and hard to see? I once dreamed of futuristic technological advances outside the gravity well of all consuming capitalism. Those were the days I tell ya!
LOL! out of this world take on that event
The article explains it as tagging your own cells in your body with a marker that makes the immune system ignore them. Doesn't seem like a foreign body encountered sporadically would work. Allergies and autoimmune (like CL IV celiac) are different classifications of hypersensitivity with different mediating mechanisms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypersensitivity
I mean, it's making it to human trials so seems a lot more real than most of these "kills cancer cells in a petri dish" sort of things.
Yes, predictions about something, especially what intensity of natural disaster something can withstand, are more likely to be wrong than a current measurement of something verifiable (and under scrutiny) by others. That's the nature of predictions. That the weather service can't give the precise path of the hurricane (even if they've claimed to) doesn't mean I need doubt the current wind speed they report. Believe what you like about this situation. I find it more likely the IAEA has it right.
This bit of news made the rounds late October. It's cool but they go to lengths to, IMO, misrepresent the achievement. It took them 1.5 weeks to do this. It has a great big battery but they give the impression that you can drive more or less continuously from solar alone. No mention in any of the many articles you can read on this (they must all be sourced from the same press release or similar) about charging rates to charge the whole battery. The best you can see is on some of the articles they say cloud cover could impact range by 50km. At what sort of speeds that is based on is up to anyone's guess.
It took a month. The guardian article on this made the rounds a month or two ago. You just can't get enough via solar to run continuously. It has a big battery for sure. Charging rate is just super low.
Edit: please excuse me. 1.5 weeks, not a month.
Classic red/blue loctite situation.
I get preferences but the distinction is overblown. I've never baked anything that didn't rise right or came out salty because of the butter distinction. 1/4 tsp per stick of butter isn't likely to mess with anything. The only time I've ever noticed the difference was unsalted butter on toast. I was like "why doesn't this taste like anything?"