While it looks like mixed results at first, on closer inspection every one of those is for the same case. It appears that as of the latest ruling, he does not owe child support.
266 karma · joined December 24, 2013
I was on a multi-day hiking trip with a friend where we just had a pack of cards and some spiced rum to keep ourselves entertained in the evening. The first night we decided to play cribbage, but we didn't have paper or the like to keep score on.
At first I tried using a stick to scratch out numbers in the dirt. It was doable, but very awkward. The low light of the camp fire made it hard to see, and I quickly ran out of undisturbed soil within arms reach.
I then gathered a few twigs to shape into numbers, using the patterns you'd see on an LED clock. That worked reasonably well, but took more effort than I liked.
I switched to Roman numerals thinking that the simpler shapes would be easier to work with. This turned out to be true, but I discovered it had the added benefit of being really easy to increment numbers.
In most cases, incrementing is incredibly simple. To go from 0 -> 1 -> 2 -> 3, you simply add a stick each time. To go from 3 -> 4, you pinch together the bottoms of the 2nd and 3rd sticks. Then you take the first stick away, then later drop it on the other side of the V. Add another stick, cross some sticks, etc.
There are a lot of things that seem poorly done at first glance, but make total sense when you understand the environment they were developed in. I've heard younger folks wonder why old TV shows are so poorly written. When you've always been able to watch on demand (or rent episodes on DVD), it's hard to understand the restrictions on writing when there was no way for your audience to watch previous episodes if they hadn't seen them when they had aired. And of course this is true for most software I've ever worked on.
With fully digital players, I guess there's no reason to not have dynamic EQs that adjust along with the volume. I'd think you'd see this more often, but I guess even basic EQs aren't available most of the time, so it's just not a feature that most people would care about.
A lot of songs are mixed with less bass than ideal, because the engineer knows that everyone and their grandma has that bass boost button permanently down on their stereo. Or people are using beats headphones that crank the low end.
The ideal mix also changes over time. Part of that is fashion. Every period has its own ideal sound. But another part is the equipment the average listener has.
Ever have a beater car with a terrible stereo? Music from the 60s will still sound great because it was mixed to sound good on transistor radios. You can hear the bass guitar even though there's no low end on your setup. Anyone who had a K car in the 90s has a love for CCR. That's a fact.
In previous decades music was mixed to sound good on wood encased speakers, which have their own resonance characteristics. For modern music, you assume plastic. You also have to assume that a large portion of listeners are going to be using apple earbuds, or some other cheap earbud.
When working on a mix, you usually have a few different speakers to choose from in the studio. But the final test is always how it sounds in a car.
$ watch -n1 'echo $((1500000000 - $(date +%s)))'
I guess these are different reports, but I know a genetic counsellor who describes 23andMe's carrier screening tests as "the bane of their existence". Those reports seem not-so-easy to understand based on the patients she sees.
One problem is that they warn that your offspring are at high risk for some condition, when really "high risk" means 0.5% higher risk than the general population. The other is that they may say you are not a carrier for a certain condition, when they only test for one variant of it, where proper tests will test for multiple variants. They can both scare and soothe irresponsibly.
I worked with some really, really good directors and actors, but there's a limit to what they can do. The biggest constraint is the need for perfect mouth flap syncing. The original Japanese versions aren't even very well synced, but English-speaking audiences apparently demand it. It really constrains what you can do with a performance.
Emotional explosions that are great in Japanese seem really cheesy when done in English. Since Japanese syllables almost always end in a vowel, you get these really big month flaps that are hard to work with. In really bad dubs, it's why you get lines like "Heyyy! What's the big ideaaaa!" so often.
Of course, dubs usually have a tiny budget as well. That means that there's only one actor in the studio at a time, so they never get to play off of each other.