tifik

I don't understand US laws nearly enough to form an informed opinion, but it just seems odd that a city council would or should play a role in an employment dispute.

The whole concept of collective bargaining kinda evaporates when the collective is small enough, and the company large enough, that the company is be able to not give a duck about the entire collective and their collective actions. In this case they can just fire them all on the spot ("can" as in are able to, not as in have a legal right to) and it evidently doesn't cause any large enough issues for them.

I sympathize with the workers, but they clearly overplayed their hand.

This video demonstrates various polygonal shapes forming in a spinning drum of boiling liquid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6L0vKP1_m4

Sorry, I should have written 'practical way to arbitrarily change...'. One of the sibling comments to yours touches on the topic of increasing the frequency, which is what I was getting at with the practicality and energy consumption.

I don't think we currently know of any practical way to _arbitrarily_ change the wavelength and frequency of electromagnetic waves (within the same medium), and even if there was, it would likely take so much energy that it would never be efficient to spend the energy this way.

Somehow submerging the plants within a different medium to change the entire spectrum would also likely not achieve any gains either, because by doing that you can only reduce the total amount of energy in any part of the spectrum, not shift it elsewhere (afaik).

edit: added 'arbitrarily' - as replies point out, moving towards the lower-energy end of the spectrum is not hard.

Theoretically, but I'd wager running a coal mine is many times more expensive than letting water or wind run through a turbine, so it may not be economical as the running costs of a mine would not get recovered.

> Getting to a government office was historically a barrier.

That is a very good point, and something I did not include in my logic. Thanks for pointing that out.

I agree that it would suck for tech non-savvy people, but at the same time the literacy of general population with any technology naturally improves as time passes. Of course, while there is still a big enough chunk of people that do need a require (or just prefer) a particular way of communicating, it should be generally available at a good-enough level of convenience. The key is of course to only start scaling it back at the appropriate time, at which there is so few people that they can be considered outliers (and I mean actual, statistical outliers, not 'whoever the government doesn't consider important enough').

But all of this is of course just like my opinion man. Just a very interesting topic to think about.

That sounds pretty shocking. Was that during the covid lockdowns or is that just standard procedure?

Depends on how you define 'technology'. When the government needs you to fill out a form, you can go to their office and they provide the printed form and a pen. Paper and printing are human inventions, therefor I would consider them 'technology' for purposes of this debate.

That said, I know it's a bit of a leap from paper to internet access. In my country at least, I can say confidently that there is a law mandating free access to government services. At least such services that you are required by law to interact with.

You do not have to interact with the government or the central bank via these new technologies, the same way you do not have to interact with them via email or phone, since you always have the free option to do your business in person. Although obviously it is a much less convenient way to do so, but convenience isn't a right, and having more money is mostly about living more comfortably and conveniently (past the point at which you can cover your basic needs, which most democratic countries cover with their social systems).

In democracies, the second any interaction with a public institution mandates some kind of technology, without providing an alternative, I would assume a basic free option would have to be provided to legal resident of such country.

While Vrbetice is one of them, there is a million reasons why Czechs support a defensive war effort against Russia.

E.g: being occupied for decades by Soviets and seeing the country wither under the Moscov rule.

Perhaps it was, but surely that doesnt absolve replies from following the guidelines.

Im not cheering for either side, but the article provides very concrete arguments to why tipping creates an environment where servers are revarded based on racist and sexist notions, which seems extremely undesireable to me. Is that a system you prefer? Why?

You might want to review the guidelines for commenting:

"Be kind. Don't be snarky. ..."

It's someones view. If you feel its unhelpful, I'd be curious to know your reasoning behind it.

Ideally, they would fall back on a robust social system, but that is another debate.

Ultimately we are talking about abolishing an undesireable status quo somehow. Not changing anything is certainly not going to have achieve that.

The world is incredibely connected by roads. So much so that places that disconnect two large networks have their own names. E.g the 'Darian Gap'.

Although the term 'road' is pretty loose. Figuring out the graph of places connected by paved roads might be quite interesting.

To stop tipping would be the first step. The market would take care of the rest.

But I know its not that simple in this chicken and egg situation.

Thats a pretty strong statement. Can you elaborate on that a bit? Im not familiar with the US university standards, and while what you write seems like intuitively it could be true, based on the history of US, I'd be curious about specific examples of standards that cater to a particular race and gender.

Cute model names for 'Prosim Sedni' and 'Prosim Sni', which means 'Please Sit' and 'Please Dream' in Czech.

That the car is written off doesnt mean it gets scrapped though. It usually gets auctioned, and if its fixable, some mechanic can buy it for peanuts and put it back on the market.

Link directly to the Nature article for those curious (or, like me, if you just want to see the pictures): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-40593-3

Its a soft login-wall. The modal didnt come up again when I refresh the page.

It's a tad insensitive, and I just plain disagree.

I still dont see why this would be a surprising find in any way. That teperature seems very pleasant and conductive for life. Maybe the extend of the ecosystem is what is shocking? Why point out a relatively normal temperature then though?

I dont know if you are being racist or trying to sarcastically point out racism against white people, but the first sentence in the article says "Corruption, government incompetence and policy paralysis", and Im guessing SAR doesnt have a white only govt.

Yeah, because they are asked to/legally required. I was questioning incentives to hand over information on their own accord, just because they can.

If they choose to sure, but I dont see what incentive they would have. After all, the post is about a company removing products from a market rather than being subject to a law that would allow the gov to force them to do so.

Is this actually true for present time satellites? I find it hard to believe that teams designing satellites today would not go for such an 'easy' weight reduction, however limitted it might be.

Is there anything preventing the team that made the discovery from naming it "Tatooine"?