solid majority of the popular vote

narrow plurality

What? They still sell DVD players: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/blu-ray-dvd-players/dvd-players/abcat0102005.c?id=abcat0102005

People probably mistakenly assumed the law was in good faith and would do something like ban hanging crosses around the classroom, not ban covering up part of your body. Calling head coverings “religious symbols” is flatly dishonest. Next up anybody who doesn’t eat bacon at every meal will be fired for forcing their religion on others.

A European starling called “The Mouth” was able to mimic sounds well enough to reproduce a drawing in the spectrograph:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCQCP-5g5bo

Those “richest people” lists are based on publicly known wealth, which is almost exclusively public stocks. There is a lot of dark money out there.

Strange things are afoot

Paper is paywalled, but from the SciTech article it looks like mostly it was sodium sulfate. They did also make some “ocean-degradable plastics”.

Thanks for the link and breakdown.

It sounds like a better description of the estimated thinking speed would be 5-50 bits per second. And when summarizing capacity/capability, one generally uses a number near the top end. It makes far more sense to say we are capable of 50 bps but often use less, than to say we are only capable of 10 but sometimes do more than we are capable of doing. And the paper leans hard into 10 bps being a internally imposed limit rather than conditional, going as far as saying a neural-computer interface would be limited to this rate.

“Thinking speed” is also a poor description for input/output measurement, akin to calling a monitor’s bitrate the computer’s FLOPS.

Visual processing is multi-faceted. I definitely don’t think all of vision can be reduced to 50bps, but maybe the serial part after the parallel bits have done stuff like detecting lines, arcs, textures, areas of contrast, etc.

leaves no calling cards

I think the engravings on the bullets were intended as a message. It seemed like he expected to be caught with his “manifesto” as well. Not saying that’s sufficient to call it terrorism, but it does show a bit of intent beyond anger/revenge.

Haven’t played, but I found this (negative) review compelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-Kd2BBpx8

He did play through the whole game.

Oh. Sorry about that.

Incidentally Equifax’s new slogan

Like a spider dangled over the fire by a thread.

No I wasn’t emotionally scarred by high school American Lit, why do you ask?

omg Toad, you can’t just ask people why they’re purple!

If there was a government-mandated monopoly on coffee and it was sold in L/s, we probably would.

The notion that housing should take up a particular portion of your income is fundamentally flawed. It relies on a fixed relationship between prices of different classes of goods, when that relationship varies over place and time.

Which situation is better: making 50k take-home and paying 15k in housing costs (30%), or making 100k and paying 50k (50%)?

There are real problems in the housing market and overall affordability, but this statistic is like trying to measure national health by the percentage of people drinking 8 glasses a day of water.

It’s a crude rule of thumb that was questionably useful when it was first promulgated, and now is entirely adrift from reality.

nobody thinks Ted Cruz is a man of great honor

No highly esteemed deed is commemorated here… nothing valued is here

It is dangerous and repulsive to us

The danger is still present, in your time, as it was in ours

Not sure what njm is trying to say, but Harris and Cheney did do an appearance together:

https://youtu.be/aPdRtKbw2L4?t=1318

It hard to see this as anything other than a bad faith comparison.

1. It compares trans-oceanic LNG vs. US domestic coal
2. It makes a lot of assumptions about inefficient and leaky extraction, processing, and transport approaches
3. It only considers CO2 and methane ignoring other ways that LNG is far cleaner than coal

It is important to consider the entire life cycle of LNG, but a more even-handed author would conclude we should address these inefficiencies (e.g. via regulation), rather than fixating on promoting coal.

Direct link to paper: https://scijournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.1934