kokanator

Airborne landmine removal via drone. This is a breakthrough for those parts of the world inundated by this scourge.

>and to look up the groups you're in and see if they're related to the KKK or something.

This what the FBI background check is for. They already have/know this.

According to the logic we should require all males under the age of 21 to register their social media accounts as 6 out of 9 mass shootings are committed by males 21 and under. [0] Remember not all/most shooters purchase their guns.

[0]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/02/us/politics/mass-shooting...

It appears as though the government would like to use gun registration as means to actively surveil on citizens.

This seems a bit far reaching. They already know your address, social security number, DOB, phone number, any aliases, height, weight, etc.

What do they propose to do with the information?

>how many crimes were prevented

Is this really a reason to give up so much autonomy and let the government know your every whereabout?

Think about the implications. No government ever in the history of the world has been trustworthy. Giving the government this much power simply to 'reduce crime' looks more like a cliff than a slippery slope.

Agreed.

It is perhaps necessary to be completely comfortable with the surroundings. To those who have not found complete comfort with nature and would be concerned about things like twisting an ankle ( as if you couldn't do that on a curb or broken sidewalk ) it may be difficult to enter this mindless state in nature.

What is very odd about the absolute focus on _in the cities_ is if you were to switch that with _in the desert_ or _in the hills_ or _on the mountain_ the feelings the article is describing are very similar to the sense I have when I have actually left it behind and am now 'lost' if you will in my surroundings.

This seems similar to the difference between hiking ( trailing walking ) and off trail trekking. The later is more of an overland pursuit where any number of surprises await from geological formations to stands of vegetation to a vast array of creatures.

It is the unknown just around the bend of the ravine, or inside the stand of trees, or over the next ridge that causes me to disappear into a more natural world as often as possible.

Wouldn't you say the flâneur has very strong parallels to the wandering and discovering our ancestors made?

"The term "standard of performance" means a standard for emissions of air pollutants which reflects the degree of emission limitation achievable through the application of the best system of emission reduction which (taking into account the cost of achieving such reduction and any nonair quality health and environmental impact"

Note the portion that states "taking into account the cost of achieving such reduction". This is in the very first paragraph. The argument is that they have not adequately done this.

Or, if you backed off certain regulations perhaps there could be 300 ships still with better conditions than all other ships. Far greater good overall.

What is the intersection where there becomes more bad ships and less good ships because we fail to see the tipping point?

Have we created a better situation or in our determination to be vastly superior in our regulatory manner have actually created more bad?

You are assuming all regulations are reasonable. In the case of safety it is possible some are not reasonable. There is actually a level of safety vs risk we are willing to take for a given activity. ( Think actually getting into a car ).

Mike Rowe has a great take on this and it seems like an interesting way to look at risk intersections as they pertain to 'reasonable' regulations. Regardless if those regulations are safety, environment, financial, etc.

https://mikerowe.com/2020/03/walk-me-through-this-safety-thi...

Should we have regulations? Without a doubt. Can we regulate ourselves out of existence? Absolutely.

It is odd to me that no one is talking about the largest reason ships are not flagged as US.

Straight from the article:

"Today just 0.2% of all ships are U.S.-flagged. Many ships now fly under the flags of Panama, Liberia and the Marshall Islands — countries that allow ocean carriers to bypass a slew of safety regulations, labor laws and taxes. "

The US has basically regulated itself out of the shipping business. Think about that for a second and then wonder if the issue is really greed. The US regulations has made it insanely more expensive to have a US flagged ship.

How do we compete in a global market when the regulatory atmosphere is so lopsided?

You should read the whole law. It does limit their ability and has checks in balances of which they have over stepped. It is that simple.[0]

The court has stated if they want to extend their authority to the level they are enacting then congress must pass laws to expressly denote that intention.

States have rights in the original law. They are exercising this right and the court has agreed with them.

I think the last sentence in the original article sum's up why people are truly upset. Remember the court didn't say the EPA can't do these things in the future just that Congress would have to give it the authority.

From the original article:

"It's now clear this court will turn a sceptical eye to agency attempts to cite vague or broad laws to enact any sort of major regulatory changes. That's a significant development, given how difficult it has been for Congress to pass substantive new legislation in recent years. The time when presidents could find unilateral "work-arounds" in existing law may be coming to an end."

[0] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2013-title42/html...

>They are not, for example, legalizing marijuana, on the grounds that the FDA should not have the authority to schedule drugs

But the FDA DOES have the congressional mandate by law to schedule drugs even details regarding what those schedules are.

The difference here is the EPA does not have the mandated far the reaching authority they are enacting which would fundamentally change the entire economy.

Not the first time MIT has proposed pushing a cloud of debris into orbit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford

Do you mean a stringent bar? A bar that is hard to identify?

Full text of "emergency": “Medical emergency” means a condition which cannot be remedied by delivery of the child in which an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness or physical injury including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself."

This is very clear a covers all possible situations where the pregnant woman's life would be in danger.

This is very straight forward. If however, you mean to say it restricts abortions too far, you are arguing a different point.

It is important to note the position was that of the Hospital and not a legal position. All laws in place or being contemplated allow for abortive procedures in medical emergencies such as when the mothers life is in danger.

For instance, the Mississippi law which was the impetus of the recent SCOTUS ruling has the following language:

“[e]xcept in a medical emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality, a person shall not intentionally or knowingly perform . . . or induce an abortion"

There are issues with the ICD10 codes related to D&C procedures as they reference or include the word 'abortion'. This should be resolved by the AMA.

The US government can compel a man to sacrifice their entire body ( and blood ) for the greater good of other citizens should they wish. [0]

[0] https://www.sss.gov/

Actually this is not true.

The US government can compel you to sacrifice your entire body ( organs and all ) for the greater good of other citizens should they wish. [0]

https://www.sss.gov/

I will assume your comment was sincere.

No one said farmers are not able to repair other brands.

The point is not all dealers/part suppliers are within a geographically reasonable distance. Think in hundreds and hundreds of miles or states away. Not just the other side of town.

John Deere on the other hand has rather dense distribution by comparison.

Farmers can fix most things on their farm. This is true for machines, fences, structures, animals, etc. Their ingenuity and hard work is how they survive. The ability to take advantage of weather windows as well as harvest and sow at the appropriate times allows them to maximize their output.

Being required to wait around burning days waiting on some specialized technician who can charge exorbitant fees does not work.

Give farmers access to the appropriate parts and resources and they will make their machines function and operate.

The post arrives at the wrong conclusion.

DSA style problems are good if used correctly.

Give a candidate a good challenge, preferably with some requirements that can have different interpretations, ask them questions, help them and collaborate with them.

The analysis of the whole exercise should be your hiring determination not whether the problem was actually solved.

Did the candidate:

- stick with the problem?

- ask meaningful questions about requirements?

- ask for help from a senior when stuck?

- explore different avenues to solve the problem?

- handle criticism?

Of course it is great if they solve the problem but often that often only shows you that they have memorized algorithms. ( we have the internet these days )

And only those in the trial effectively limiting its availability to select group of individuals.

And if we had a single payer system the government would never control who got care and who did not receive care....

Agree but confused....

Asking a few questions in response would be meaningful:

Do you ever write scripts to solve routine tasks so you don't have to do them over and over again?

Of course you do. Most ( not all ) of these examples are attempting to abstract a problem. In some cases they do that well in other cases they don't.

Have you upgraded your OS in the last 20 years?

Again, of course you have. Each of those upgrades have some useful and some not so useful things.

Did you upgrade your vehicle to a Tesla?

I can't answer this one but the same applies here. If you want to state "well yes because it helps the environment." My response would be simply a large number of auto advancements over the last 20-30 years makes the vast majority of that a reality for you.

So no, you will not stop attempts at progress. Some will win and others will become Studebakers but this is the activity that drives innovation.

> IIRC there was some research from Denmark suggesting the opposite, namely that the significantly harder steel pellets would have a higher probability of punching through bone and hit vital organs rather than deforming and lodging in the bone.

Great point and one I tend to agree with. But this actually causes an issue. At issue here is that the steel keeps its shape and does penetrate deeper without expanding creating shot size holes through those organs which do ultimately cause death after the bird has flown away and later dies. Unless you hit the heart directly the organs will take time to fail.

Lead on the other hand causes more catastrophic injuries which makes the game more retrievable resulting in less wasted game.

This is an interesting ammunition. A sabot for sure but the flat/concave face keeps it out of the shotgun acting like a rifle scenario. Thank you for directing me to this.

I grew up in one of these game units. It was a shotgun only unit. Unfortunately, a steel slug in a shotgun would permanently damage the shotgun because steel does not give the way lead does. A shotgun has a choke which reduces the barrel diameter toward the end of the barrel. There are sophisticated ways around this problem such a sabot loads but this begins to make the shotgun perform more like a rifle defeating the entire purpose.

> Hunting is so expensive anyways. What's a few more bucks? Pun not intended

This is not a true statement. I started hunting with a $115 shotgun and a $35 license which in turn provided my 1 deer, dozens of rabbits and countless ducks. If I were to take just the deer into consideration compared to lets say the price of pork at $2.99 / Lb. ( not to mention the cost of beef ) One hundred pounds of pork would cost me $299. The deer cost me $150 and I get to keep the gun. No I didn't need a truck, I walked out the door and into the woods. Yes I had to buy ammo but it lasted several seasons and I got to use the gun for the rest of my life.

My junior and senior year in school hunting provided all the protein for my family.

Of course, just likely anything else, you can make hunting as expensive as you would like it to be.

>Concentrations of lead more than 100 times this limit have been detected in the meat of lead-shot carcasses as far as six inches from the entry wound.

In which direction? Was there any indication of damage? Did they only measure from the round bullet entry?

The statement provides no additional details. The entry wound is often small, about the size of the projectile. While the damage after entry is greater and often identifiable. It is important to follow the projectiles through the game.

It is interesting how many obviously non-hunter and/or non-shooters are weighing in here.

Having hunted nearly 40 years for all types of game and in a large number of different settings I wanted to provide a few observations from experience to help the conversation:

- Lead tends superior ballistically to alternatives

- Lead induces less damage to the firearm

- To use non-lead alternatives you typically either have increase the size of the projectile( (s) in the case of shotgun shot ) and/or increase the powder charge. This typically means an individual will need to purchase different firearms. For instance, to get close to the ballistic performance of lead shot in a 12 ga shotgun you will need a 3.5 inch shot shells. The vast majority of shotguns accept 2.75 or 3 inch shells.

- Steel shot in shotguns is more likely to wound game by creating bleed tunnels causing the animal/bird to bleed out much later and not be retrievable. Lead creates more catastrophic immediately fatal wounds.

- When I took hunters education we were taught about lead and how to prepare game to minimize the risk of exposure. When my children took hunters education 15 years ago they were provided the same education. Not to mention the education they received from me.

- Damaged meat can be identified and cut away. I was taught to cut at least 3 inches outside of the wound margin. From the xrays I have seen this seems appropriate. This doesn't just include the entry wound but also other areas of impacted meat. Process your own meat and take pride in the result.

- Copper bullets do not expand as quickly and as effectively as lead bullets leading to more wounded game.

This is a significant and life changing side effect. One that should be getting more coverage than it is. Additionally there appears to be no followup with individuals in the at risk categories post vaccination.