temp8964

But you need multiple steps including the driver’s test to get a driver’s license, then you can drive. In this recent shooting, it’s obvious the shooter got his guns way too easily. I am pro-gun but I think you should be required to have a gun license first before you can buy a gun. And a mental health test and safety test should be passed to get the license.

> Irrationally, a high school science teacher typically has massively more "education" coursework than science.

This is not true. A high school science teacher usually has more science coursework than education coursework. Usually, they have a bachelor's degree in a science field, and then complete a teacher preparation program, which is much shorter than the bachelor's degree.

Medical schools usually have separated funding sources too. Many professors are in fact practicing medicine in their field.

No. Football coaches don’t get salary from tuitions. Athletic department has separated funding sources.

I wish someone can build an unbiased fearmongering indicator for news sites.

For myself, I use Google News and I immediately filter out any source for any fearmongering headlines.

I would say it’s both a misconception and a conspiracy theory.

You seem to adopt a more narrowed definition of conspiracy theory. I agree you do provide a valid example. However, as you noted, "in the sense of 10 years ago", you may also agree that it would be harder to distinguish with the broader sense of "conspiracy theory" used today.

Where did I take the hospital's side? I said the hospital made a mistake. I am not satisfied with the title of the report because I think the hospital's mistake had a valid reason, it's not an intentional scam. It's not like the hospital intentionally hide the price and then charged her with a high price for no reason. I think the out-of-network insurance mistake could actually happen. That's my whole point. You guys are second-guessing my intention. It's not my fault at all.

It's true that misconceptions are not the same as conspiracy theories. However, misconceptions on social phenomena are more likely become conspiracy theories, because they commonly involve speculating other people's behaviors or intentions.

In this case, I find it very hard to distinguish. Is believing inflation caused by corporate greed simply a misconception or is it a conspiracy theory? I'd like to hear someone can elaborate on the difference. Like on what condition it's only a misconception and to what point it becomes a conspiracy theory.

Seriously, where did I imply the patient is in the wrong?

Where did I imply the patient is in the wrong?

Did you read my comment? Where did I support the hospital?

What’s your point against my comment?

What’s your point against my comment?

If you read the article, the hospital made a mistake, didn’t know she’s an out-of-network patient, so got the insurance wrong.

If you only read the title, it sounds like the hospital scammed her. All the reports on this news sound this way.

The downvotes are crazy. I in no way indicated that the woman should pay the full amount because of the hospital’s mistake.

Also, if you have an open mind, you could see another perspective: her insurance is amazingly good, cutting $23k bill to $1.3k.

Actually it’s the purpose of the side pushing for this. They want this to be put in practice before it’s officially shut down by the court.

After he resigned, everyone cut tie with him and his grants were took away. If he had sued the university, the university can't do anything to him while the lawsuit is going on.

> He resigned from the Whitehead, and eventually MIT, at the advice of his lawyers who thought it would help him secure his next job. (“I one hundred percent regret that,” Sabatini told me).

I feel this is the most critical mistake he made. There are stories that those who fought back actually got to keep their jobs (and reputation). The university investigation never gave him due process and was totally biased. He might had a chance.

It’s actually sad to see it go. I really want to see how ridiculous it can go down the road. This ends too fast.

Yes. There are a few cool things only exist in R:

- R Shiny

- RStudio Jobs

- RStudio Server

- RMarkdown, Blogdown, Bookdown, etc.

There were people committing suicide because they couldn't go to hospital to get treatment. Everything is locked down.

But hey, let's do the math ...

Hard drives can be turned to sleep when they are not being accessed. If you do that, the electricity cost will be very low.

There is a believe that this will damage the hard drives. I am not sure how valid it is.

> data hoarding, which is a problem.

Data hoarding is not a problem. It's a hobby.

Everyone needs a hobby, most hobbies cost money.

Traveling? Cost money.

Woodworking? Cost money.

Photography? Cost money.

Biking? Cost money.

Gaming? Cost money (+ way more time).

Data hoarding is just a hobby like others. Plus data hoarding can have great value, if you choose to hoard good content.

This pic belongs to r/battlestations/

By invading Ukraine. LOL.

> Array indexing is such a core thing and I don't understand why anything mathematical or scientific would start with 1.

From data analytic point of view, indexing should start with 1. When we analyze a data table, we always call the first row as the 1st row, or row #1, not row #0. It will be very strange to label rows as 0, 1, 2, 3, .... It may be fine for people with Computer Science background. But it would create so much confusion for almost everyone else...

I am OK with either way, because my political philosophy is personal choice. It really does not matter which specific option leads to better outcome. My point is that there are people who do not hold this philosophy and they will demand for equal outcome. Read my top comment, it really doesn’t matter which way it goes, some people will make it a political issue.

Also, they can always link the difference to race/gender etc. Say, if there are more women or racial minorities chose option A, and then option A leads to less wage increases, then the company will be in trouble.

You would be Okay with it because you like to work from home and others choose to take all the trouble to go to office so that they can have more chances to get familiar with the bosses and learn about things not online.

This semantic difference does not seem to be relevant to my point.

If say you choose to work from home and then you find out your coworkers working in office get more wage increase or promotion than you do, would you be OK with it?

Caving to the demands from a small group is not uncommon. Also, they can always link the difference to race/gender etc. Say, if there are more women or racial minorities chose to work from home, and then working from home leads to less wage increases, then the company will be in trouble.