Thank you! Why is the main link a giant screenshot?
336 karma · joined February 19, 2021
And even if we turned it off, it only changed from a 24 hour deletion to something like 30 days. The chats certainly wouldn't be kept permanently.
Corporate data "retention" policies are entirely intended to avoid future legal "discovery." My understanding is that policies like Google's are considered "best practices". For example, my current employer deletes Slack messages after 90 days for the same reason. It is also extremely annoying.
My current employer even deletes Google Docs after something like 180 days unless they are put into special folders.
That doesn't sound right. 70 kilotons would be very small for a hydrogen bomb. Indeed, one Wikipedia article says it was a 1.4 megaton bomb, twenty times the number the Wired article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSV_Alvin#:~:text=On%2017%20Ma....
And this other wikipedia article says: "The Y1 nomenclature indicates a W28 warhead with a yield of 1.1 megatonnes of TNT"
ironic
That would not fit inside of Boom's aircraft.
The standard for criminal conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
There is no possible way Adnan Syed's conviction reached that standard.
many of today's tech giants seem to thrive with the opposite approach: offer no customer service at all.
The speed limit was in fact 65 MPH until 1995.
But also, it's a basic interview technique to explain your thinking out loud.
Hardly.
It is number six on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r...
And does not even appear on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_employers
> they are the most prestigious place to work
Eh, that doesn't seem to be a universally accepted point of view.
Well, they are 35 years old and have $600k, which says something.
I would say that we measure space in two different directions concurrently.
> and then looking for changes in the interference pattern between light moving along each of the dimensions
This is true, but I like to push back against the use of the phrase "interference pattern." We're not looking at a "pattern", which to me brings to mind a complicated interference pattern resolved spatially. We do not resolve the "interference pattern" spatially. We measure the amplitude (er, power) of the light coming out of the interferometer with a photodiode (a single pixel, if you will.)
> In practice, gravitational waves will come from all sorts of weird angles, but they will distort each of the two dimensions differently
This is true. The detector's sensitivity to waves coming from different directions is the "antenna pattern."
> t they will distort each of the two dimensions differently and allow us to figure what direction they were propagating by the interference pattern that's observed.
With a single detector, we cannot determine the direction in which a g.w. is propagating. With a single detector and a transient (short-lived) source, we cannot tell the difference between a loud source in a direction where the detector is not very sensitive versus a quieter source in a direction where we have good sensitivity.
With a network of detectors and/or signals that persist for a long time (compared to the rotation of the earth, etc) we can resolve the source direction.
This is an interesting idea, but I think it's not right.
To be honest, even as an experimentalist who worked on LIGO, I'm not sure how to treat the effect of the g.w. on photons in the arm. Instead I think of the entire arm cavity vacuum as a giant phase modulator.