66
It appears that my email has gotten in the hands of some scammers with a botnet or something. What do I do?
(self.nostupidquestions)
Relevant user name?
thebestaquaman
joined 2 years ago
Any information on how this works? I just see the interceptor fly above the other drone, then sparks, and the other drone is falling out of the sky. Is the interceptor carrying something underneath?
It's a relevant question either way: Regardless whether you think all education should be free (which I agree, it should), this is about how they plan on resolving this specific case of making education more accessible right now.
Whether education should be free altogether is a whole different question. In that case, it would make sense to also discuss whether it should be free for everyone, or whether there should be some income limit.
In Norway we've landed on a solution where the education itself is free, but in order to qualify for a government stipend and government-backed loan (with very good interest rates) in order to support yourself studying you need to have a fortune below a certain (high) threshold. Personally, I think that's a nice trade off between accessibility and preventing rich people from making money off of a welfare program.
My deepest core belief is that there is a non-zero likelihood (which may be quite high) that everything I think I know about the world is wrong.
If it was proven to me beyond a doubt that something I know is undoubtedly correct, I would probably think that there was a possibility that the proof was wrong and go on with my day.
I still think it's a fair question to ask, because as far as I understand, there's nothing forcing Harvard to use the same method as the federal government. Have you seen anything on how they plan to do that?
Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I try my best to interpret things in the best possible way (sometimes to the point of naivety). In a way, I think of it as "choosing to be happy", in the sense that if someone says or does something that could upset me, I try to look for a way to interpret their actions as something that doesn't upset me.
Of course, this doesn't always apply, but I've experienced that it makes life a lot better. A lot of unpleasant things can be attributed to mistakes or misunderstandings, which are a lot easier to not get upset about than people being intentionally mean.
There has to be some objective method of categorising whether someone lives off their parents income or not: it's a relevant question to ask.
Someone can live in the same house as their parents while paying full rent and being responsible for their own food, effectively being economically independent. They can also live on the other side of the country while being 100% sponsored by their parents. It's not trivial to categorise whether someone qualifies for something like this.
I think the possibly final test for American democracy will be the midterm elections in two years. By then, I think that either trump will have broken the system enough to get a sham election, or we'll see real, verifiable push-back against him. International organisations that monitor elections will probably take part in shaping my opinion on whether the election is fair or not. I think it's worth remembering that whenever countries hold "fake and forced elections" there are plenty of international observers that point out the major rigging going on.
I personally know a Serb that denies it, and then uses "NATO lied about Bosnia" to justify that "therefore we can't trust them regarding Butcha or Irpin, or NATO involvement in Ukraine."
It's frustrating as shit to listen to this guy. Also kind of crazy, because he's highly educated and actively works as a researcher, but still seems to have created a kind of information bubble for himself.
You also use halv tres (50) and halv firs (70) don't you?
Warning: Very coarse and quick explanation incoming. The details can be worked out if you're interested.
Not a biologist here but a chemist: Without giving a definitive quantitative answer I can say that sunburns are essentially a kind of endothermic reaction (you add energy, which makes healthy skin cells turn into damaged skin cells). Pretty much all reactions follow what's known as an Arrhenius-type rate law, which states that
r = k_0 exp( - E / RT )
where E is some energy barrier to reaction and RT (in typical chemistry) is basically the energy available to cause the reaction. What I do know about biology is that protein denaturation also follows an Arrhenius-type rate law. For a sunburn, the energy supplied is radiation energy rather than thermal energy, so we can replace RT with hf where h is Planck's constant, and f is the frequency of incoming radiation. The time it takes you to "get a sunburn" (we're really getting slowly burned all the time, but don't notice unless the burn rate is significantly higher than our healing rate) is inversely proportional to the reaction rate, so we have
t ~ (1 / r) ~ exp( E / hf ).
It's likely that what this calculator does is estimate E based on skin type and protection, and f based on the local UV-index.
Now, if you plot this function (or better, the reaction rate) and play around with the dependency on E and f, you'll find that, especially for low E (low protection) the function is extremely sensitive to the value of f (the UV-index). This means that if the calculator has a small error in the estimated UV-intensity, that can propagate to a huge error in the estimated "time until sunburn". Furthermore, the function is also extremely sensitive to the value of E, especially at high f, so if the UV-index is high, but the calculator has a slightly wrong estimate of the effect of skin type and protection, this can have a large impact on the estimated exposure time.
TLDR; It's likely that the calculator is based on an Arrhenius-type rate law. This model is, under certain conditions, very sensitive to the two input parameters (skin type / protection level and UV-intensity). Therefore, small errors in the input parameters can cause the model to give estimates that are very far off reality under those conditions.
I don't really know if this fits in this community, if not just take it down. The map is from the BlackBird group.
Regarding the recent strikes on the Seim river crossings, I've been speculating what Ukraines plans are. Not too long ago, the Ukranian advance around Korenevo slowed a bit. Then they started systematically hitting the Seim river crossings, of which ISW assesses there is only one left.
If the goal was to encircle and trap Russian units, I would assume that Ukraine would make a hard push through Korenevo to the river. As it looks now, it seems like they are leaving a small corridor open. Whether that is due to Russian resistance or Ukrainian planning I have no idea.
This makes me wonder whether they are intentionally leaving a small opening (See: Sun Tzu) to try to make Russian forces low on resources funnel through the opening where they can inflict heavy casualties, or whether they are trying to force the Russians to expend resources trying to prevent being cut off before they close the net.
In any case, I can see Ukraine wanting to secure another major road towards Korenevo that they can use to supply the offensive.
Of course, I don't want anyone to reveal anything that could violate OPSEC, everything I read is based on OSINT. I'm just interested and would like to hear other peoples speculations.
In a sub like this, we cannot exclude the possibly best attempt at taxidermy, made by some poor soul that had likely never seen a lion.
view more: next ›
That sounds probable, but I still wonder how they're firing it without trouble from the recoil, some kind of recoil-less rifle design perhaps? I remember some people were speculating about that when the "shotgun-drone" video were circulating.