cjensen

An 80 year old male in the US has a life expectancy of 8.4 years[1]. That's a lot of time to bet, especially since "aggressive bat" is almost certainly rabid.

[1] https://www.ssa.gov/oact/population/longevity.html

To address a few points made here... this isn't about frontline mobile bases or airplanes or ships. This is about "what if... we have a main base located somewhere with poor supply lines?" In other words, something like Afghanistan.

In Afghanistan, shipping fuel in was extremely expensive resulting in costs of $400/gallon (~$100/liter) at the destination[1]. At that level of shipping costs, electrical generation is so expensive that it makes sense to investigate small-scale reactors to see if they could make economic sense.

[1] https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/63407-400gallon-...

The category isn't public "officials or people running for office." If you carefully read the preceding comments, you'll see that "public persons" is the phrase that was used. I think perhaps you read the "public" part and misunderstood what the phrase means in legal writing. In legal writing, it's a bit nebulous as mentioned, but includes well-known people commenting on matters, people who become unintentionally well-known for their thoughts, in addition to the obvious stuff like politicians.

Host of a nationwide broadcast? 100% a public person and not even close. It's a dumb lawsuit and a good lawyer would have told Stossel as much.

Instructions like this need to be interruptible since they take longer than standard instructions. I assume the ARM designers have thought about this?

That's not what happened. Minaj claimed "a friend of a cousin" had a simply impossible side effect. This is pretty clearly a simple case of an urban legend being shortened from "friend of a friend of a friend" and so the rumor always gets passed on as "friend of a friend" no matter how many links there are in the chain.

Did you notice that you shortened it from "Minaj claimed a friend of a cousin..." to "Minaj claimed a friend...?" Hey, you're human too just like all of us. We suck at passing along rumors.

The US has excellent credit because, beginning with Alexander Hamilton, it has never ever cut a payment on debt no matter what crisis it thinks it faces. Treasury notes are as good as money because of this.

Keep in mind that debt is a liquid asset. If you were foolish enough to not pay out Chinese debt holders, they would simply sell to Americans. The notion of "lets not pay xyz" has spectacularly bad outcomes because it signals to the world that you are not a serious nation when it comes to debt.

In the long term, the US strategy has clearly paid off.

It is not an industry standard way. It is not a sensible way. It is not even a C way.

As others have said, there's no reason whatsoever to use void* here. Just declare the struct without defining it in the header. Then only define it in the C file. C is fine with pointers to structs which are merely declared but not defined.

Platforms have a First Amendment right to silence voices they don't like on a platform. The First Amendment protects both a person's ability to say things, and the person's ability to not say things. As a general rule, both people and the government cannot compel someone to say or reproduce an opinion they don't want to.

Your claim that people have become intolerant of free speech is unclear. For example, speech which generates "vicious attacks" in response is still free speech. The responses are also free speech.

True threats should be reported to the police. That's not intolerance, that's just plain illegal. On the other hand if by "real threats" you mean hyperbolic threats, those are also free speech.

Free speech is not a guarantee that others must listen, or that they must listen patiently. That is not now, nor has it ever been, the definition of free speech.

Worth noting that in the US, this could not have happened. The First Amendment covers academia which receives Federal Funds. There's even an organization which is dedicated to defending this principle in court[1].

[1] https://www.thefire.org

Your interpretation is almost completely wrong, and is a good example of why we layfolk should leave the explaining to experts.

For example, you said "my vaccine doesn't protect you and vice-versa." That is entirely unsupported by this paper which merely says "transmission between vaccinated people is possible." You have interpreted this fact well beyond any actual evidence. For example, the proposition "the vaccine makes it hard to transmit, and makes cases very mild" would be entirely consistent with this study, and is completely in opposition to your incorrect conclusion.

So far, all evidence points to the vaccines working exactly as well as anticipated.

You're right that the abolitionists were better people who lived at the same time. My point is really that people can be good in many honorable ways and yet also be complicit in the common evil of their time. Likely many abolitionists were against LGBT; it's good to remember both their greatness and their failings.

The notion that we can only recognize perfect people in history seems misguided since there are precious few perfect people.

Audubon owned slaves. Muir was racist. Webb was discriminatory. These are all teachable moments: the evils in our past were not solely the fault of the worst people in society; even the best people were responsible.

C/C++ compilers commonly have warnings for narrowing conversions, and separate warnings for mixing signed/unsigned conversions for same-sized values.

While some folks aren't too fussed about warnings like this, those folks generally aren't writing secure code like kernels. I'm very surprised that kind of conversion was permitted in the code.

Good question! So this is like US companies paying bribes. The employee handbook for my first job said that bribes could be paid in other countries if they are usual and customary. Bribes over a certain sum required executive authorization.

The US has now made paying bribes in other countries into US felonies. So now US companies do not pay bribes if they are sane.

So sure, an attacker could say "Go get some BTC and deposit it. Where do you get some? Not our problem." But then the executive in charge would have to choose between (1) committing a felony with jail time attached for him or (2) possibly going out of business and finding a new job. For sensible people, that's not really a choice.

Sure, we could fix the flaws in every accessible software on the planet. Or we could outlaw non-traceable payment methods like Bitcoins so that there is no profit in ransomware. What are they going to do? Ask for payment of a million dollars in iTunes gift cards?

It's incorrect to say I'm "assuming" that. I tried very hard to steer clear of making any assumptions or expressing my own views in my comment. I definitely did not make that particular assumption.

There is, however, one assumption I did make: there is no stated policy that min wage workers should be able to afford all that while spending 30% or less. If I'm wrong and there is a stated policy, I would like to be corrected.

Article is really "minimum wage workers cannot afford a two-bedroom apartment while only spending the recommended 30% of their income on housing."

There's a lot of assumptions there. Assumes minimum wage workers should not have to get by with a single bedroom and a couch in their own place. Assumes minimum wage workers should not have to spend more than 30% of their income on housing.

Now maybe that should be our policy. I just don't think the headline should be "can't afford rent" until we've made a concrete policy decision as a people that supports the premise that they should be able to afford it.

They are not deciding how you use your money. They are deciding which third parties they are willing to send your money to on your behalf.

They're happy to send you your money. They just don't want to have any relationship with Binance.

One way around SafeNet is to run the builder in a VM, then RDP into the host.

Record highs do not work that way. Record highs are by definition outliers. For example, in the Bay Area when we get some record highs during a heat wave, only around ~5-10% of station get new highs. Part of the issue is that except for San Francisco (which has 150 years of records) the records have only been kept for less than 100 years.

Let's compare two scenarios: (1) no warming and (2) warming.

With no warming, when a heat wave hits we get a few new highs. This is because (a) heat waves a rare events, so we may not have one in the record for that exact day and (b) due to microclimates in the area, the exact conditions will affect which sites are able to beat the record. And (c) there aren't that many records to compete with.

With warming, problems (a) (b) and (c) still apply. But you get a nice little bias up which should increase the number of sites obtaining new records. Yay except... the amount of warming so far means that it won't be a complete wipe out of new records, but rather just "more."

The question is how to distinguish the two cases. How do you tell if it's just the expected number of records being broken vs an increased number? The answer is stop doing that! Instead we should look at all daily temperatures -- rather than focusing on the count of record breaking highs -- because then we have a lot more data to work with.

In any case, the PNW heat wave does not match any reasonable expectation for the types of records we expect to be set by global warming because records would have been smashed regardless of warming.

None of this argument is an "anti-global warming" argument. Too many people conflate "science says this particular event was not a sign of warming" with "this person is a climate denier." If we're going to follow the science, that means less panic over individual events and more concern over the ongoing changes.

If you have one hundred cities, then a "once in 100 yrs" event will happen in ~1 city per year. So first lesson is be careful assuming extreme events are necessarily linked directly to a trend.

Cliff Mass' Weather Blog has been covering the heat since it was first predicted by the models a over a week ago [1]. His view [2] is that this would be a 100-year (or more!) event regardless of global warming.

So the expert analysis is that this is not an indicator of climate change, but that warming is sure not helping.

[1] https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-greatest-heat-wav...

[2] https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2021/06/incredible-temperatur...

Right? We all have our issues. When it affects our wellbeing we should all remember to try to get help. If the Medical profession can't make it all better, many managers will accommodate -- it's actually easier to accommodate someone who is trying to get help.

Please don't assume the question is "disingenuous." It's an invitation to talk about what's going on, and bring the manager into the loop. Most managers really do want to help!

More concerning to me is the "I always lose my job or quit." It sounds a lot like you're running into a pattern in your life which causes you to underperform. If it's emotional or mental, please consider seeking counseling. Brain chemistry can send a person on a roller coaster, and counselors really can help.

If the problem is simply that you are bored with the work, then could you move on sooner to a new job? Better to find new stuff than get bored so much it affects your work.

During reproduction, chromosomes are "mixed" together [1]. You don't get a straight copy of the parent chromosome.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosomal_crossover

I believe they will all flush (i.e. fly away for defense) when a predator wanders by, so they have a survival mechanism for re-finding their nest.

Your position is that it is "hysterical" that people don't want to be deeply inconvenienced by petty theft. I cannot fathom such an outlook on life, so I won't address this point.

On the facts though, you again misunderstand. I'm frequently not home to sign for things. I live near the Silicon Valley, yet my post office is a six mile round trip. My UPS delivery office is a 40 mile round trip. Amazon lockers do not accept large packages.

I feel that at this point you are clutching for straws to justify your original position.

That's exactly why I'm surprised. I don't understand why the birds don't come back after the excitement is over -- except possibly the ones closest to the crash site.

I'm a birder, so some extra info...

On dogs, training and leashes only matter a little. The problem is birds immediately identify a dog as a dangerous predator. They are far less bothered by humans.

Birds pay more attention that we might realize. They identify potential threats from much farther away that we do. This leads to them being disturbed even when the casual rule-breaking dog walker thinks "I'm not doing anything wrong."

I'm extremely surprised so many birds abandoned their nests permanently. I would have expected only the closest nests to be abandoned.

Some people rely on their drones to tell them when they are in a no-fly zone. Terrible idea. Once at Hayward Regional Shoreline, I had to tell a guy that he was potentially creating a problem. I told him the two locations where endangered species can be found and that he should avoid -- and also that he was definitely within the limits of Hayward Regional Airport. He was both contrite and horrified that his drone didn't tell him.

They other issue is boundary-pushing. Literally. Give people a space, and many people will act like selfish toddlers and push the boundaries. Sunnyvale Baylands allows drones and it's a great space for them. There is a clearly marked fence they must not go beyond. So of course people constantly violate the fence. The fence is to a marshland with endangered species. Drones can fail, and a drone that falls into the marsh is not retrievable and then what happens to the toxins in the battery?

Simple problem? Not sure what you mean. In my neighborhood, the chance of an Amazon package being stolen is very high. The post office is not involved in many of the deliveries.

Because of my house's location, I have not yet lost a package. But I'd like a camera to see if anyone is checking out my porch when there are no packages just to see if I should worry. Previously, the idea that the police could just grab my video made me personally concerned about privacy. Ring providing logs alleviates that concern for me.