LodeOfCode

>If I'm spending my money on a slot, I have the chance to get my money back.

The risk there is of gambling addicts "borrowing" money with the intent of winning back their losses/debts, losing and repeating (as claimed with the Sliker situation that prompted this all). Throwing good money after bad is presumably much less common/excessive when you can't cash out

I'd argue the "experiencing unbearable suffering" part is redundant anyway, since "I'd literally rather die than continue to experience this" is about as close to a definition as you're going to get.

And while any standard of "sustained" and "prospect of improvement" will have their edge cases, that's arguably still better than either absolute of availability.

The problem is ensuring it's truly voluntary, which seems rather difficult

Depends where/how you want to live.

Retiring at 35 you should be able to get away with a 3.25% SWR [0], which'd give $65k/yr from $2M. But a) that'd be mostly long-term capital gains, which have lower taxes than regular income and b) you wouldn't have to save for retirement. So you'd probably end up with the spending power of someone making ~$80k salary

[0] https://earlyretirementnow.com/2016/12/14/the-ultimate-guide...

92.6% of children by age 24 months

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/immunize.htm

>Is your opinion that anyone can renege on known consequences of their actions?

That's usually how medical treatment works, yes. We don't tell people who fall off a ladder, slice their finger chopping vegetables, or break a bone playing sports "You knew the risk, you're just gonna have to live with the consequences of your choices"

>I don’t know if that completely makes up the difference, but the real disparity is nowhere near the numbers that get thrown around. It’s apples vs oranges.

The CDC[2020] reports an infant mortality rate of <0.6%. Excluding all of it would only increase life expectancy from 78.8 to 79.2

[2020]https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db395.htm

>require 3/4 majority in both houses of Congress

2/3rds of each house, 3/4ths of the states

>study examined the effect of a school-based program encouraging outdoor activities on myopia.

"Outdoor activities" is a terrible way to differentiate between sun exposure and large environments

Hard to tell, since the article doesn't bother to cite any sources for most of its claims. Including this paragraph without a single source is just incredible to me

>Meanwhile, that big picture just keeps getting more interesting. Vitamin D now looks like the tip of the solar iceberg. Sunlight triggers the release of a number of other important compounds in the body, not only nitric oxide but also serotonin and endorphins. It reduces the risk of prostate, breast, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers. It improves circadian rhythms. It reduces inflammation and dampens autoimmune responses. It improves virtually every mental condition you can think of. And it’s free.

>Quelle surprise, the staff never unplugged their smartcards, and instead borrowed someone else's card when they needed to move around the building.

And now that the staff is used to lending out their cards an attacker pretending to be a new hire can bypass both access controls

Local charities don't even fully cover the holes in the existing welfare system. Why would you expect them to be able to bear the full burden in its stead?

>he should instantly know the pair if both numbers are prime

That should actually be "if the product of their respective smallest prime factors is over 100". 7x11 can't be ruled out since 1x77 also produces 77, whereas 49x17 and Nx53 can be ruled out.

You can also rule out some of the larger squares, e.g. 25x25 and 64x64, so there's probably still a better phrasing for that

Edit: Can also rule out 1xPrime

For that you'd want to look at when the death probability exceeds 50% (108 for men, 109 for women). By 112 there's only a 40% chance you'll live to your next birthday

>They do everything they can to block, blacklist, and crush campaigns of progressive primary challengers. They could do that to the "moderate" members who don't want to pass any legislation at all, if passing that legislation was really a priority.

Manchin's a senator from West Virginia, a state that went for Trump by 39 points. Crushing him would just have McConnell not bringing any legislation to a vote again.

From a dietary perspective it's mostly irrelevant: due to thermodynamic inefficiencies, raising and consuming animal( product)s will inevitably involve farming more plants than eating them directly.

So unless only some plant species have emotions, veganism is nevertheless the best one can do (short of synthesizing food from scratch at a molecular level)

From an evolutionary perspective, I don't see why plants would have emotions. In animals it makes sense as a mechanism to steer our actions in a more survival-prone direction.

But AFAIK plants have extremely limited agency, so I don't see why evolutionary pressures would favor the development of emotions in plants .

Even with Bayes' theorem, if your prior is zero, you can ignore any evidence - no matter how strong - that doesn't absolutely require the hypothesis to be true.

Oh, yeah! My profs'd also post the list of which TA did each (sub-)question, so that if we had questions about why we lost marks we knew who direct them to (although all grading disputes had to go to the prof, to disincentivise people from arguing with the TAs)

And with two teachers, you'd also be able to have each write half the questions, and split the grading that way.

With the LED they'd only need to go look at the screen when there's a question. Actually, if you put the laptop in the middle of the front row, set the font size large, and used a clicker to go through them, the teacher could probably read the questions from anywhere at the front of the class. It'd still be an issue if you wanted to move about the back of the class while giving a lesson; but that's a hassle anyway, since the students' desks face the front, so IME it's rarely done.

>shouldn't need to spend their own money on basic COVID-19 supplies

Not covid supplies, school supplies pre-covid (which they also shouldn't have needed to, but did need to nevertheless).

And hiring enough surrogates would eat up a huge chunk of that $1.45 million, given that you'd need, what, ~10 per school for nearly 2 years now? Actually, that's more doable than I expected.

The grading (and lesson planning/assignment & test writing, though those scale anyway) would be split between the teacher giving the lesson and the one acting as a surrogate, so they'd basically still have the same load each.

Edit: probably on an alternating assignments basis rather than a "half the students' papers for you, half for me" basis, for grading consistency/fairness reasons

Edit2: Actually, for feedback-latency reasons it's probably better to split grading the other way. I wonder whether it's better to split each assignment randomly, or grade as two separate classes with shared lectures.

>whose job was to monitor chat/messages from the virtual attendees and raise his hand to ask a question to the instructor

Seems like a human solution to a (mostly) technical problem. Basically you just need a way for students to mark a message as hand-raising (and maybe a way to point out another student's message), a chat filter for the teacher to read those messages, and a USB LED (or some such) to act as a raised hand until the messages are marked as read. Of course there are some edge cases, like temporarily ignoring a child who's repeatedly raising their hand to troll, but this still seems like it could've easily been usable by the start of fall 2020.

You'd likely still need a surrogate for young children and special ed students, but you could probably eliminate ~2/3rds of them (? I'm not sure how old children need to be before they can be expected to remember they need to mark their messages & how to do so)

>tradeoffs (fewer rooms, multiple students per room and/or higher cost) they would require

You can increase the house plan from 22 windowed rooms (counting the double room twice) to 32 without changing the shape of the building by moving 4 of the dorm blocks to the other side of the multipurpose room and not having one of the washrooms face outside. That would also reduce the distance from the dorm rooms to the multipurpose room/staircase. Design's just bad.

Unrelated to the windows, it's also weird that the bathrooms from adjacent dorm blocks aren't back-to-back so that they could easily share plumbing.

Those should only differ by a factor of 2 [the collision rate for an image is the number of collisions it has divided by the number of other images, so the average collision rate is the total collisions divided by n(n-1) vs. n(n-1)/2 pairs] which isn't particularly relevant at this scale

I'd guess the fare review only covers the $9.06 listed as fare, and not the service fees/net earnings

For #10, both buttons say the black button is opt out. Since the question says at most one is true, they're both false and white is opt out.

It actually calls aurochs bovine, so I think the parenthetical was supposed to be a separate list item

"rhinoceroses, wild horses, an extinct wild bovine called aurochs, and people."

With thanks to dn3500: "Development of the Field Artillery Observation Battalions" has the story about the toilet told by Bragg himself (on pg. 8) [0], though apparently it was an improvement of an existing process.

[0] https://books.google.ca/books?id=tbjVAAAAMAAJ&q=bragg#v=snip...

I remembered hearing that on QI, which was enough to turn up this[0]:

> "The panel are shown a photo of a man and are asked how his bare bottom helped Britain win World War One. The man is William Lawrence Bragg, a physicist and the youngest ever Nobel laureate. In 1915, he was in Flanders trying to figure out a way of using sound to locate enemy artillery. One day, he was sitting on the latrine in the house where he was billeted, and noticed that when there was nearby gunfire his backside momentarily lifted off the seat, even if he didn't hear the explosion. Another physicist he was working with, William Tucker, was billeted in a tar paper hut, and noticed by his cot that there some little holes, and even on windless days little puffs of air were blowing through. The two compared notes, and concluded it was due to inaudible, low-frequency sounds of artillery. They thus began to build detectors, and by 1917 the Allies had really devastating advantage when locating and targeting enemy guns."

Unfortunately, I think it's probably made up; I couldn't find a solid source for the story, which seems unlikely if it were true (given that it's a great story, Bragg was decently well known at the time, and 1915 is fairly recent [by "sources disappearing in the sands of time" standards, at least])

Edit: although I suppose the story would've been highly classified for years, so maybe it's plausible that there would be no solid sources.

[0] https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/qi/episodes/15/14

Maybe they have a separate computer for that? As long as it doesn't have anything secret on it, it shouldn't matter much if it's infected.

Though they'd still have to be careful that what they search doesn't give anything away, and that an adversary might be injecting results, so maybe not.

>Otherwise most European countries should explode since social distancing is no way taken as serious anymore.

A cursory look suggests most of them actually have been exploding in new cases since mid-july/early-august