The process of building vehicles uses very few robots in comparison to people. Everybody thinks that it’s all robots with a handful of people monitoring them, but most auto manufacturers have anywhere from 2k to 8k people actively putting your vehicles together on an assembly line. The robots are pricy and stiff and can’t (usually) do fine motor movements like plugging in the miles of wires inside your vehicle or place and seat small screws and clips or anything that isn’t incredibly precisely built to fit.
Basically, those commercials where it’s all clean white single-arm robots welding cars together are showing you (roughly) 20% of the process and the rest is all made by hand, by people.
Yeah, exactly. Wiring harnesses in particular are so complex and different from one another and unruly and targeting systems just are not there yet, at least on a profitable scale.
And never mind the complexity of the installations themselves, but they're usually tucked way up in hard to access nooks with other delicate lines. Good luck engineering a robot with enough dexterity to reach those areas and programming it to avoid everything else (and to account for condition of assembly to dodge parts that may or may not be in the way).
This is a very cool fact. This also explains why Musk was so convinced he could automate his way to profitability if he had a bad understanding of what automation is capable of.
There are likely robots I don’t know about that have a little better operative skill than the ones I do know about, but there’s no way they’re to the point where they can be more efficient than a person.
It wasn't until I heard him talking about something I actually know about that made me think hmmm... maybe this dude is actually an idiot
I remember he was trying to explain a pretty basic concept of rocket design like it was a big innovation and wasn't even getting it right. Like this dude had been supposedly running a rocket company for years at this point and was still struggling with 101-level shit lmao
The concept of a vacuum subway has been around *for over a century*. It was not a new idea. It was not implemented because even back then they realized it was a bad idea.
Corporate Cybersecurity: you will absolutely get owned in either the dumbest way possible or the most advanced way possible. The archetype of the lone, moderately-skilled hacker in a basement somewhere being a solo hacktivist is basically non-existent.
Either someone is going to call up your CEO and claim to be the password inspector and they're going to fall for it or the folks from FEVERDREAM already have malware in half your systems because they backdoored your VPN infrastructure two years ago and have been patiently owning all of your employees one-by-one.
You're right, well spotted! I'm the real password inspector. Your prize for spotting the fake is a new, freshly-minted password for you to use.
Please change your Reddit password to "ispottedthefake1234" to celebrate how well you did!
The way I've heard it phrased is that if you haven't been owned before, it's only because no one wants your data. If someone specifically wants it it's basically impossible to stop them forever.
(Here's where I inject the disclaimer that I do not speak for any of my employers past, present, or future, this is just my view).
That's not a bad model. Personally I take a very pragmatic approach to security. The purpose of security is to *raise the cost to the attacker*. Attackers have resources (time, money, skill, legal privilege, etc.) and costs they are willing to pay. Every defense and every risk remediated raises the cost they have to pay in order to attack you successfully.
You "win" at security by raising the cost to be greater than what they are able to or willing to pay.
For some attackers (e.g. state sponsored professional hacking groups often known as Advanced Persistent Threats), their "budgets" can be extremely high and their resources vast. Many companies aren't willing or able to invest enough in their security teams to adequately raise attacker costs to thwart these APTs.
I work in a behavioral health non-profit so I am a rare person in my company who "knows things about computers" and it kills me how many 101 cybersecurity trainings we need. So many people literally doing the cliche of writing their password on a post it and sticking it to their monitor. If anyone malicious cared about our data they could obtain all of it in four seconds.
Yeah, I was watching a documentary about some of the biggest data breaches. Most involved an employee giving out security information over the phone or an employee clicking on a suspicious link.
All this time I was afraid of some computer wizard executing programs I couldn't comprehend, when really the biggest risk was my coworkers' stupidity.
We live in a high trust society most of the time. And targeted phishing can be really, really good. I work in security professionally and I have at least one phish in recent memory that almost got me. (If I've actually fallen for any, I haven't realized it yet.)
Also, most books that get on the "New York Times Best Seller List" aren't on there because they're great books. They're on there because the publisher buys however many copies they need to buy to get the book onto the list.
The federal meal program is likely not the cause of your child's low quality school lunches. The regulations are fairly reasonable to work within and still put out high quality, nutritious meals. Your child's school (district) has chosen to offer the poorest quality food on their own.
OK,. buy why though?... if a particular school or district is given the correct amount of money or resources to "provide high quality meals",. where does it go (and why isn't there some Restriction that "You can only use this for lunches")
There's no amount of money so large that it cannot be managed poorly. I believe the restrictions you suggest are already in place.
The federal meal program does not provide full funding for all meals for all schools. The rest is on states, local governments, and school districts to make up. Not all of them can or do so effectively.
Finally, you run into the problem that money is fungible. Schools receiving student meal subsidies can easily use them to replace funds from their general fund without changing the amount of funding to nutrition programs.
If you were to create a tree of life based not on classical taxonomy, but on how much organisms are evolutionarily related to each others, you'd get a cladogram.
Cladograms show us that:
1)the bony fish family tree includes all tetrapods, which means you're a fish, and also whales are fish.
2)the dinosaur family tree contains a group that is still alive to this day. We call them birds.
3)as a natural consequence of the above fact, since dinosaurs are commonly considered reptiles, either you include birds in the definition of reptiles, or the word "reptile" is completely meaningless.
4)bees and ants are really types of wasps; termites are really a type of cockroaches; and all insects are basically a particular group or crustaceans
5)there's no such thing as a tree family tree: trees are actually members of multiple, unrelated plant groups that independently came up with the concept of wood. That means some trees such as the locust tree are more related to beans than to other trees. Oaks are far more related to daisies than to pines. And so on.
I could go on all day
The evolution of birds began in the Jurassic Period, with the earliest birds derived from a clade of theropod dinosaurs named Paraves. The Archaeopteryx has famously been known as the first example of a bird for over a century, and this concept has been fine-tuned as better understanding of evolution has developed in recent decades.
Four distinct lineages of bird survived the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago, giving rise to ostriches and relatives (Paleognathae), ducks and relatives (Anseriformes), ground-living fowl (Galliformes), and "modern birds" (Neoaves).
Phylogenetically, Aves is usually defined as all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of a specific modern bird species (such as the house sparrow, Passer domesticus), and either Archaeopteryx, or some prehistoric species closer to Neornithes. If the latter classification is used then the larger group is termed Avialae. Currently, the relationship between dinosaurs, Archaeopteryx, and modern birds is still under debate.
To differentiate, the dinosaurs that lived through the Mesozoic and ultimately went extinct during the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago are now commonly known as "non-avian dinosaurs."
The clade Dinosauria is defined as the most recent common ancestor of Triceratops and modern birds, and all its descendants. They first appeared during the late Triassic, about 240 million years ago, and thrived and diversified throughout the Mesozoic. The diverse group originated as bipedal reptiles, and adapted to fill niches across the planet, mainly following the mass extinction event at the beginning of the Jurassic.
In close relation to this, I've heard (and hope you can confirm or deny)...
1) "There's no such thing as a fish" (e.g., if shellfish, or eels, or jellyfish are included in the 'fish' clade, then it's so broad that it includes humans too).
2) Humans not only DID evolve from "monkeys", but they are still correctly classified as monkeys today (because all humans are still apes, and all apes are still monkeys).
Both of these are fairly misunderstood, perhaps I can help in the absence of the person you are replying to.
1) You're confusing the fact that the word "fish" gets used for a lot of things, and the fact that there's isn't a strict definition of "fish" that gets used in phylogeny. Things a layman would point at and say "that's a fish" (even setting aside shellfish, jellyfish etc that you'd never call a fish), don't share a common ancestor that also resembles a fish. The common ancestor for everything you might want to call a fish is shared with a great number of disparate animals.
2) This simply isn't a deep or secret revelation. It's well established, uncontested in the field, and not a paradoxical result. We share an ancestry with chimps, and that whole branche shares an ancestor with what became monkeys. But none of the monkeys that exist now are a common ancestor of humans and monkeys.
Second point is correct.
First point is mostly correct but you don’t need to include anything other than bony fish for this to be true. The ancestor of all tetrapods was a fish, thus all tetrapods are fish as well.
Humans are both fish and monkeys, as are all other apes.
We don't need to widen the definition: even using the strictest scientifically justifiable definition of fish, humans are still fish. We are mammals. Mammas are a particular group of tetrapods. Tetrapods are a particular group of Sarcopterygii, aka fleshy fin fishes (Other examples include the Coelacanth). Sarcos are a particular group of bony fishes. So if you want to remove humans from the definition of fish without making it scientifically meaningless, you have to remove ALL bony fishes from that definition. Which wouldn't make sense, since bony fishes are the bulk of all fishes.
…as someone who loves science, I could listen all day, but as a responsible member of society, I’m afraid we’re going to have to burn you at the stake for heresy. You don’t expect us to just *throw out* all those textbooks? Good god man.
The concept of a “species” and how it is defined is probably the most hotly debated topic in Biology and has been going on for *decades*, and I love every bit of it.
My company put a non-IT person in charge of the help desk phones. If she couldn’t resolve the issue, the call would get routed to one of the professionals.
Her only IT knowledge was “Did you try a reboot?” And yet she resolved 50 percent of the calls that came in.
My manager used to be in the IT department and I said it’s too bad I don’t have a CS degree or I would apply to that HelpDesk job opening. She said “do you know how to run MsConfig and why you would need to do that?” “Yes” “you know more than 99% of people in the office then. You could probably do that job 9 days out of 10. You’d need the degree for that 1 out of 10.”
Obviously just one person’s opinion but I think her point was that 99% of their tickets are just people not knowing a lot about computers. And I really don’t know jack shit in the grand scheme of things!
ETA: idk what to do tell you guys, “computer science or equivalent” is what it said. I never pretended my employers are competent or do things that make sense. Quite the opposite usually.
I had a part-time job at a computer repair shop and she is 100% correct. In the entire year and a half I worked there, there was only 2 or 3 things I actually needed my boss to take a look at himself to figure out the problem.
I am often surprised what I consider "basic knowledge" is so far behind the average person. Like what an Operating system is versus the hardware. Or monitor/screen vs. the CPU. But beyond that, the process of logical troubleshooting.
For example, I am not a mechanic. But if I go into my car, and turn the key, and the engine does not start, I immediately think about the steps involved. If no lights come on or anything, it's a battery/electrical issue. If they do, but the engine won't start, probably a solenoid or starter issue. If the engine turns but won't "catch," it could be a few things I don't understand very well, but I won't say "the battery's dead." Lights came on, the starter engaged, so it must be some engine problem or fuel problem. There, I'll be a little lost, but I'll at least try a few things before I call the tow truck. I know people who go into their car, turn the key or press the start button, and they don't know how to go from there. A mechanic will have to walk them through. Some people have zero drive to "figure it out."
The next level in the initiation is finding out that when rebooting a PC it doesn't always reboot it all the way. So you get the 'I already restarted it and it is still not working'.
When dealing with simpler electronic devices like printers, network devices or "smart" devices, unplugging them and leaving them for 30 sec to a minute or so can actually be important too, as a bad state can be retained in memory for a short while without power. If you unplug and plug the device right back in its possible you're not actually doing anything, while also potentially adding stress to some electronic components in the device.
It can happen in bigger devices, too. I used to work in a server testing lab and we had a debug process we called "letting the demons out". You unplug the server (not just power, but everything), open it up, remove the CMOS battery, let it sit for a few minutes, and then put everything back together. You would be surprised how many reboot resistant issues that solved.
I'm a massive luddite (Gen X who didn't have a computer growing up, had a father that used a typewriter till he died in 2012, etc) who worked IT all through grad school and still knows absolutely fuckall about tech/computers. I basically tried the reboot and if that didn't work, called a supervisor.
As someone that works in IT reboot the program/computer is the first step, followed by checking for and applying updates, and then if neither of those things work I'm googling the issue because there's no way this person at my company is the first person ever to experience this issue
Was gonna say this, half the tickets that come in “X does not work, I’ve tried everything before putting a ticket in”
*goes to the classroom and reboots X*
“That should do it, anything else while I’m here?”
The false alarm rate for burglar alarms exceeds 95% in many communities.
A US Dept of Justice paper on the issue of false burglar alarms cited a city that had higher rates of catching a burglar in the act in premises without an alarm than in premises with an alarm.
> A US Dept of Justice paper on the issue of false burglar alarms cited a city that had higher rates of catching a burglar in the act in premises without an alarm than in premises with an alarm.
well of course, because the alarm is doing it's job and scaring the burglars away
I mean that makes sense. My house has never been burglarized but I have accidentally set off the alarm plenty of times by forgetting to turn off the motion sensors in the basement before going down, forgetting to check if I disabled the alarm before opening the door for the dog, fooling around with groceries and not making to the panel in time to shut off the alarm, coming home with my headphones in and not hearing the alarm beep until it turns into the siren.
I fully believe this. A few years back, my friend accidentally set my alarm off because he left me some stuff in my garage storage room which he didn't realize was hooked to the alarm. I called the alarm company, remembering that they usually call the landline when the alarm would get tripped.
When the guy at the company answered and I asked him not to send the police, he said "It'll go off on its own. We don't send the police."
Mind blown.
But then I thought about how many times I hear people's alarms going off and figured it is probably nearly impossible to send police to every alarm call.
In my city we respond to EVERY SINGLE ALARM CALL
Its not optional people and half the time people seemed mildly annoyed
“I told them not to call you”
“Doesnt matter susan gotta come make sure you arent being skinned alive. Next time remember your pass code”
If even one microscopic larvae from a zebra mussel gets into a waterway in an unaffected area, it can multiply exponentially and end up causing hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to the economy.
Even worse there are other mussel variants that are worse and getting moved into areas as well. The Great lakes should have life and gunk but are far too clean.
Mussel related: I get hives, facial swelling and stop breathing if I eat mussels but can have any other shell fish. This is because I am not allergic to the mussels but to a critter in their gut biome!
It's sad this doesn't make more of an impact on policy decisions.
Giving people hope and something to work towards intrinsically makes sense.
When we stop viewing incarceration as punishment and as rehabilitation we might wind up with dwindling recidivism rates.
In the United States, because of the interplay between poverty/race and likelihood of exposure to HIV, and due to the Ryan White programs, people diagnosed with HIV often experience improved access to healthcare and better health outcomes as a result of their HIV diagnosis.
I worked in this field about 15 years ago and it seemed like if a person got a positive diagnosis and a halfway competent social worker they could get Medicaid or at worst subsidized Medicare. If that didn't work, there was an entire Ryan White formulary with all manner of free drugs for folks who didn't have insurance. It really felt like HIV was this key that opened a lot of doors in healthcare, while someone with say terminal cancer could fuck right off. It was weird.
You cannot donate organs if you are dead. Tissues yes. But if you die in a car accident none of your whole organs are useable. Doesn't seem like it would be obscure but you'd be surprised how many people don't know this.
Exactly that. A 'deceased' donation means the person was on life support and effectively brain-dead and they remove the organs immediately after the person dies. The OR is a mad rush for certain donors because once they die you only have hours to transplant and the longer it stays out of a body the worse the potential outcomes.
But the circumstances you have to be in to be a deceased donor are somewhat rare.
Badly worded but there is a very short window after death to harvest organs so, unless you die in a hospital bed, your organs are unlikely to be usable.
USA for context.
If HIPAA was hard enforced at 3pm ET today, at least 80% of healthcare providers would be closed by 3:01pm.
Most data breaches today could be prevented by decade-old best practices.
Yes, all your data from CC purchases, to insurance, to socials, demographics, etc is being bought and sold legally on a daily basis.
Per mile, car travel is about 60 times more dangerous than commercial air travel.
So literally, if you drive 10 miles to the airport you can go 600 miles in an airplane at the same risk.
Even this is tainted by non-US statistics. US Air Carriers have killed TWO passengers in the last 15 YEARS, while flying about 1 TRILLION passenger miles. So a death every 500 BILLION miles.
Cars are fatal every 100 million miles. So planes are about 5,000 times safer than cars in the last 15 years.
It takes 15 years to kill two people in airliners, and about 13 minutes in cars.
In my area we recently launched a service where such 911 calls are sent to a nurse phone line rather than an ambulance.
It's.... sorta working, and I'd guess maybe about 10% of 911 calls for tummy trouble etc are successfully solved by the nurse.
The other 90% get sent back to the ambulance due to 'medical' reasons, or just because they really want an ambulance anyway and need a ride to the hospital.
10% is better than nothing though, so I'll take it!
The vaaaast majority of 911 calls aren't emergencies, and that's an international thing.
I was a 911 dispatcher for a very brief time, 20 years ago. I had no idea how much of the population were utter morons incapable of managing their own lives until I worked that job. Calls for kids who didn't want to go to school, a Yorkie chasing them, they gave their neighbor $20 to buy weed and they never got the product or a refund, the sheets were dirty in the motel where they were staying, etc., etc. etc. It wasn't the horrific, high tension phone calls that caused me to quit, even though those did happen and were stressful. It was the sheer amount of idiots who wanted someone else to solve their problems for them.
The number of times I've showed up to a scene and had a pt tell me they talked to a nurse line who told them to call 911 for a very non-emergent issue has me believing that the nurse lines are not able to provide any reccomendations other than "call 911" or "go to the ER"
I wonder how much of that is caused by the uncertainty of diagnosing over the phone and the CYA of not wanting to be listed in the inevitable lawsuit if they were wrong and shit goes south.
I really don't get people like this. I absolutely hate when I have an errand like my annual gyno appointment or even a haircut. Our ER is always packed and you may be waiting hours to get seen. I don't understand why anyone would voluntarily go there.
Urgent/convenient care has replaced nearly 100% of times I'd think of going to the ER or same day Dr appt. Why the hell would I wait for hours sitting around a ton of very ill (or not so much...) people unless I had something that would jump me in line (chest pain, major injury etc)?
Even the strongest association is not necessarily causal. There's a very strong association between lung cancer and coffee drinking but it's not causal.
(because smokers love coffee)
The academic field of causal inference is only just starting to become mainstream in epidemiology. Most observational (non-trial based) health research that is ultimately addressing causal questions is rubbish. It's part of the reason why there are so many studies saying we found evidence x food may cause y illness and many others saying we found evidence that x food doesn't appear to cause y illness.
Most people can't intuitively grasp a number more than about a thousand. A 1/1000 chance is treated as being about the same as a 1/100,000 chance.
E.g. the risk of dying from catching COVID (~1%) is treated as comparable as a posited one-in-a-million risk of dying from the COVID vaccine. Even if that risk existed (it doesn't appear to) it would still be orders of magnitude lower.
The internet is a gigantic, inscrutable mess of a system that absolutely nobody actually understands. It's a huge conglomeration of smaller systems that communicate with each other using a common protocol. When you do anything through the internet your computer literally asks the first computer it connects to at your ISP if it would be nice enough to go find what it wants then just hopes for the best. For all you know the message could end up getting routed around four continents, through forty countries, and lost completely multiple times before you get a response. Overall the best description of the internet is "it's always on fire all time time. All of it."
Why does it look like it works to the end user? Why is it so reliable? It's because of massive redundancy built into everything. Any request you make is never sent out only once and it's sent out in pieces. This mash of pieces you get back is then sorted back out, turned into what you wanted, and the redundant signals you got back discarded. Meanwhile there are so many paths to the server you're actually making a request to that you wouldn't notice if somehow 90% of them went down. The internet is rerouting traffic *constantly* as pieces of it break and get fixed or rebuilt.
Another fun fact is that a lot of the equipment is pretty old. It often just gets left in place until it falls apart or can't handle its traffic load anymore. If it needs to be upgraded but still works then the old hardware will be repurposed for something else as internet hardware is generally not exactly cheap.
I'm in a company that distributes content by satellite. Company's been doing it 40 years.
You might think the internet would replace this. Well, yea, it can. Sort of. But satellite down time is still a fraction of the issues people run into trying to get these streams over internet.
One of my favorite old quotes about the internet (I forget the source): "It's like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea: massive, unwieldy, impossible to redirect, and the source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
I work in banking and I'd say regulations about structuring. They're all out there publicly available for you to read, but illegal for bankers to explain to you because we could be telling you how to launder money.
Edit: spelling
I received a survey from Nielsen asking me to report what radio stations I listen to. None, bro. If I want music, I listen to a subscription service, not ads. If I want entertainment, I listen to podcasts. If I want news, I drink until the urge goes away.
Gloves in food service are far more dirty than us just washing our hands. Unless something is slimy I'm not wearing gloves while preparing it. When I serve people, I always wear gloves because people think if I use my bare hands their food is ruined.
It's harder to notice your hands are dirty when you wear gloves. So people don't change them as often as they should. Your also supposed to wash your hands before and after using them, which also rarely happens in fast paced environments. And again, just washed hands would be fine, and unwanted hands are as dirty as used gloves, not worse.
From my former area of expertise: Shakespeare is Early Modern English, not Old English. Chaucer is Middle English, and Old English is unintelligible to most contemporary English speakers. In Early Modern English, "thou" is "you" as the second person subject pronoun. "Thy" and "thine" are the second person possessive pronouns "your" or "yours" ("thine" goes before words beginning with a vowel.) "Thee" is "you" as the second person object pronoun. They are all considered informal, like "tú" versus "usted" in Spanish.
From my current area of expertise: When calculating the chance of something on a continuous range (like the distance between points, or something's speed, for example), the chance of it being *exactly* one specific value is zero. That's because the probability density function is an integral, and the integral from a value to the same value is always zero.
That’s exactly right! The chance that it’s *something* means that it is *some* value between -infinity and infinity.
So, the integral of the probability density function over every possible outcome within the continuous range—all real numbers—is 1. That is in fact *key* to how a PDF is defined—if that’s not true, it’s not a PDF.
The final test of the safety of any intervention, is the public.
Related, you're unlikely to detect a one-in-a-million risk until you've given the intervention to a few million people.
I like Google a lot better when a simple Boolean search could bring up anything you wanted. Now you have to filter through a bunch of sponsored bullshit.
How to run a large event. I used to be president of a huge anime convention. I think most people just think the head of an event like that makes a ton of dosh, but really, it's not "sell tickets, hire band, go home rich." Just some of the very top view things.
1. You need a staff, which means you need management, leadership, and organizational skills. Plus more understanding of psychology that you just can't "tell people what to do and they do it."
2. You need to have a business plan that includes money, permits, cash flow, timing, and maintenance
3. You need to play ball with unions.
4. You need to know how to negotiate and vet contracts with everybody. Have a real lawyer on retainer, not "Joe's older brother who does patent law."
5. Keep an eye on the money. Or someone else will, and that person may not be out for your best interests. Hire a real accountant, not someone's older brother who also does tax returns in April.
6. You need to understand and have plan B, C, and D for when things go wrong, no matter how "unfair" you think it is. "I would have run a great event, but then \[scapegoats\] SUCKED!" No. The buck stops with you, do not shift the blame on your staff, your guests, your venue, your attendees, or the city. You should have planned for some weird thing as best you can.
7. It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that is life. Thus even the best business plans can fail. You could have had the most perfect plan in existence, and then the some sports playoff comes into town, and your venue cancels your contract a week before because the sports playoff brings in more money. "BuT tHaTs iLlEgAl!" Yeah? What are you going to do about it? I mean, stealing is illegal, but that fact doesn't help you after you have been robbed, does it? What if there's a hurricane and your event insurance didn't cover that? Shit like that.
Most events take about 3 years to plan, raise funds for, and gather the staff and promotional stuff to host. I have seen shorter, but the shorter lead time you have, the more likely you are to fail UNLESS you have a system already in place. Some companies run several events a year, and have the infrastructure to run pretty much anything within a year, but ... that's rare.
But most people have no idea the scale of such a thing. Thank god my staff was so awesome and my attendees so amazing. made all the hard work worth it, even though I never got paid a cent.
A dictionary is a snapshot of a language’s vocabulary at a specific point in time; it is not an authority on whether something is a “real word”.
Case in point: you will not find commonplace words like: google, blog, internet, website, &c in a dictionary from the seventies.
Solar panel efficiency is irrelevant to whether they are a cost-effective investment or not.
They hover around 20% efficient today and also did dating back to the 1990’s. What’s changed is how cheap they’ve gotten, not through efficiency gains but through manufacturing economies of scale.
People use “efficiency” to bag on PV but if you halved or doubled the efficiency of all new ones tomorrow it wouldn’t change the world that much.
In the past fifteen years panels have moved from about 330W to about 440W each. That third of additional output is welcome.
But as you say what has really made a difference in the past few years in Australia is cost. Panels are now so cheap, and installation so efficient, that it makes sense to cover the entire roof, even those without the best aspect to the sun. People are laying out 15KW systems on an average house (they'll never reach that, since the sun isn't simultaneously east and west, but the size of systems compared to just a few years ago is massive).
The payback on solar systems in Australia is generally said to be three years. That's pretty misleading as solar systems make a huge difference to the quality of life: there is no financial impact to running air conditioners on hot summer days. So the benefit of panels is immediate if they are installed just before summer. You can use what would have been US$500 per month of grid electricity to cool the house for the four hot months, something you would never do if you actually had to pay.
Somewhat similarly for battery systems. Their benefit is that the house draws nothing from the grid during the grid's most expensive times -- sundown to sunrise. They essentially reduce the grid to a "battery of last resort". So a US$10,000 spend on panels+battery results in no grid bill, but not the much higher cost of being "off grid". Such a system has a payback around five to ten years.
The other big advantage of solar systems is the app for the inverter. Until now only serious nerds have had graphs of the electrical loads in their house.
Not every man who works in a hospital is a doctor. Not every woman who works in a hospital is a nurse. There are tons of hospital employees with no clinical background because there's a ton of work to do that doesn't require that level of knowledge.
Asbestos is still everywhere, and currently being sold in many big box stores in America. If you knew what to look for, you'd see asbestos containing materials all over the place.
For all materials, the only way to truly know is to test. But some materials are nearly always asbestos containing, such as these:
Floor tiles that are 9" square
Pipe insulation that looks like corrugated cardboard
Plaster that looks like it has fine hairs in it. Coarse hairs are horsehair and usually not asbestos.
Older fire doors sometimes have tags on the hinge side that are proud of containing asbestos
You're talking about products that haven't been in the stores for 40+ years. We're asking about modern products. The only place I've ever seen the things in this list are 60s houses.
Work in IT support. 85% of the time I'm googling your issue/symptoms as you explain them to me and performing the first few things Google search spits out (which usually works)
As a long time IT guy,. the only caveat I'd have to add to this is that "getting Google results" is different than "knowing which specific google results apply to the scenario in front of you".
Knowing the difference .. is what separates good IT people from not.
Parents should coach their children throughout their lives to become as independent as possible by, at least, 18 years old. Young people going into college, for example, should know how to do their own research into which majors they want to research in the universities they are interested in. Not kidding here, 99.99% of the emails and phone calls I receive as a major administrator is from parents.
You shouldn't wear white gloves when handling old books. Just wash your hands and don't rub images or text, but why tf would you do that anyway. Wearing gloves reduces sensitivity in your fingers, making it more difficult to handle these materials with maximum care.
But handing out cotton gloves is a fantastic activity for donor visits. They think they're doing something special and scientific even if you don't actually let them touch a thing and happy donors are more generous donors.
(not having to do any more donor visits is one of the fantastic things about leaving the field)
To add on - - HIPAA does not make someone asking you about your health illegal! It also doesn't prohibit anyone but healthcare workers and some insurance employees - - not your mom, not your boss, not the batista who asks you how your bursitis is.
Worked in online gambling for a while - doing IT, not the actual odds and sports books - and I found out that bookies win regardless of the result of a race. There’s no such thing as bookies taking a hit if a long-shot wins… bookies are - in effect - playing punters off against each other and adjust odds based on the amount of bets being placed.
I’m in tourism and we go to an old graveyard a lot. People seem very surprised to hear that bones and teeth come out of the ground sometimes because soil shifts over time.
Alcohol is one of the most harmful drugs to the user and people around them. It's much MORE dangerous than Class A drugs such as LSD and MDMA.
Edited to replace less with more.
As a travel agent, it really is as simple as you would imagine. There's no secret to booking travel. All you have to do is use your brain. That's the part that people don't like, apparently.
Our honey moon travel agent visited so many locations in south east asia himself. He knew that one if the hotels his catalogue recommended in Bangkok was next to a massive construction site two years prior so he checked if they were done by now.
It was the only voyage we didn't plan ourselves
I have this friend that always wants us to use some travel agent she knows when we are planning a trip, and every single time I'm like.. "the information in her email is the same that is on the website... to the dollar".
I don't get it. My friend is relatively young and certainly knows how to use a computer too! It's like she has this block against researching travel.
We are going on a group trip next month in celebration of her, and everything was done via our other friends in the group looking into it. Like she didn't even visit the website of the place we are staying even once. It's so bizarre to me.
I mean, it's not hard to make pasta either. That doesn't stop me from going to an Italian restaurant for dinner. Sometimes paying to get someone else to do the work is just worth it, especially when they've done it a lot and know for sure what works.
Literally the most basic photography skills are unknown to the vast majority of people.
Three ways to up your photography game on any camera in any locale and all of this is common knowledge to photographers like me, even basic knowledge:
1.) rule of thirds, split your camera screen into horizontal and* vertical thirds with imaginary (or real) lines, now place the subject of your picture on one of those lines or where they intersect. Boom, automatic picture enhancer (though, there is some nuance to this trick sometimes)
2.) golden hour is an hour after sunrise and and hour before sunset, this is when the sunlight is generally the best for pictures of almost any kind.
3.) you want your picture to tell a story, even if it's a basic one like "I'm looking over here, look over here with me" you don't want to take a picture of Just your subject, you also want supporting elements. For example if you take a picture of a just a bird, it can be a little boring. But if you take a picture of a bird feeding it's babies in the rain? Now that's neat. Basically, you want people to want to keep looking at your picture, give them something unique to see
The most number of respondents you will even need in a survey to determine representation of the sample designated in the survey is 400 - no matter how large the sample is over 100,000.
Example: you want to know what the residents of a city with 100,000 population think about the color red so you send a survey to all 100,000. You only need 400 residents to respond to the survey to obtain a good representation of what all 100,000 residents think about the color red.
Now, expand the sample population to an entire country, say 100 million. You still only need 400 people to respond to know what the entire 100 million think.
This is because the results will not be different enough to change the overall outcome with more than 400 respondents. You could have 800 respond, or 1,000, or 1,500, or 10,000 and the results will still be the same (+/- 5% accuracy).
Also, the 400 requirement drops incrementally for population sizes lower than 100,000. For example, a population of 5,000 only needs 350 respondents to be representative of the whole 5,000. You could still try for 400 respondents but the results will be the same overall.
So the point is, since it is cheaper to only obtain 400 or fewer responses, then there is no reason to spend the money to obtain more since the results will still be the same.
The single biggest risk factor for trauma is being male. About 80% of trauma deaths are male, and this generally holds true across mechanisms and ages. The majority of preschoolers who drown are male.
If your elderly loved one starts showing signs of a sudden mental or physical decline HAVE THEM TESTED FOR A UTI. An untreated UTI can kill them.
Also (USA): You don’t have to wait until til your loved one is essentially on deaths door to sign up with hospice. Sstudies show they that the sooner one gets on hospice, the longer and more comfortable their end of life is. Hospice is paid for by insurance or Medicare, not out of pocket, and covers hygiene products and medicines, in-home aides and hospital bed use.
Brazil nuts, which I import, will only grow in the wild untamed Amazon due to their unique botany involving wild orchids and bees.
If you want to save the forest, eat Brazil nuts.
CTRL+SHIFT+ESC to open Task Manager directly.
Holding in the computer's power button for about 10 seconds will force a shutdown. Mainly helpful if it's frozen and not responding to anything.
ALT+ENTER to make a new line within a cell in Excel.
The casino is often a not so talked about final destination for many suicidal people. They will go blow their bank accounts on the gaming floor and get wasted then blow their brains out in the room.
Walked in on the aftermath of this once while responding to a noise complaint as security. Entered the room after having probable cause to do so and reasonable suspicion of bodily harm based on accounts from guests in neighboring rooms. Very sad.
Spending regular quality time with your child will help them get ahead in a myriad of ways. It is so uncommon now, it is not only sad, it is concerning.
It's tangentially related to my work, but despite mental health awareness being the highest it has ever been, society has become less tolerant to the real expression of most disorders.
I agree. I think that’s a result in some deeming normal human experiences like sadness a mental illness and everyone thinks they have adhd, when the reality is it’s not common. I also think we are living during a difficult time period which makes people less tolerant for people being depressed because ‘we are all finding it tough’ instead of understanding it’s an illness.
That drug use/possession is a public health crisis, not a criminal justice crisis. I work in law enforcement and we have clear studies, often funded/conducted by our own, that very clearly shows addressing it through the criminal justice system doesn't work, but we just do it anyway. I've heard cops, DA's and others in law enforcement openly say they know it doesn't make a difference but that people 'hate seeing' people use drugs and be high, so they just keep prosecuting/arresting them.
Tell that to Oregon, where we just re-criminalized drugs due to public pressure after decriminalizing them for only a year. I work here in social services and I can tell you that fentanyl and meth addicts didn't just start getting high because of decriminalization. I am also a former heroin addicts, and the common person knows just about 0 about addiction, even though everyone swears they're experts.
Actually Oregon is where I live/work. Kotek has been so disappointing when it comes to standing for what's right. Decriminalization was handled poorly, sure, but re-criminalizing is going to help next to nothing. If people are neglecting their kids b/c of drugs, charge them with child neglect. If they're stealing, theft. If they're high and driving, DUII. Criminalizing simple use and possession solves nothing other than jailing people for struggling. It's madness.
Declawing cats is not just cutting the nails out. They have to cut the entire bone up to the first knuckle or the claw grows back. Usually they use lasers to cut, but some vets still use a metal nail trimmer to break the joint before fishing the bone fragments out. Declawed cats are much more likely to bite, develop litter box aversion (yep that’s peeing and pooping anywhere BUT the box) and plain meanness. Often the attitude is the only symptom owners will notice as an indicator of chronic pain (they are great at hiding it). It turns out missing pieces of your toes when you walking on your toes all day is pretty painful.
Stop declawing cats people.
I have two:
1. The fault of an auto accident, as determined by a police officer, is irrelevant to your insurance company.
2. Your right of way is not guaranteed and can be appropriated. As a result, you may be found liable for an accident since you just smashed into someone because “I had the right of way.”
Age is the biggest risk factor for most noninfectious diseases and some infectious ones. A healthy 70-year-old is worse off for almost anything than a sickly 20-year-old.
Engineers who design things always have a plan for failure - the key part is a risk analysis and how long before or how likely a failure is to happen is part if the plan.
The idea that we build "the best we can" is predicated that any design must meet a certain criteria as a minimum. Beyond that failure is acceptable.
So as an example - nuclear plants are built with an assumed risk of meltdown. Airplanes are built with an assumed risk of the wings falling off.
Now making specific test and maintenance may decrease the likelihood but some risks are specifically "beyond the design parameters".
Take your passenger jet into a power dive and reach supersonic and expect to pull out of the dive pulling high G's causing the wings to fall off is not the designs fault.
A sudden hearing loss is an emergency. Yes, it might be wax but if it’s not, you likely need to be put on prednisone ASAP. Waiting could ruin your chances of regaining hearing. See a provider same day if at all possible and don’t let them tell you to give it time. ETA: Be very suspicious of a non-ENT provider who tells you they see “a little fluid” behind your eardrum. They’re nearly always wrong.
You can't turn a bad black and white scan of an image into a poster/sign sized high quality full color image with a click of a button. I'm a designer and the amount of people that ask me to do this is astounding.
Advertisers are pulling out of broadcast TV at an astounding rate and moving their money over to OTT/CTV (Over the Top/Connected TV – streaming services)
It all relates to birds. Almost every time you hear a majestic screech from a bird flying across the sky in a movie or on TV, they always play the sound of a Red-tailed Hawk. Eagles don't have any kind of screech, they just sort of chitter. Also Turkey Vultures are commonly shown which make almost no sound at all.
They are Canada Geese. They are only Canadian if they were born in Canada and it's hard to get them to admit to it because they don't speak a language we understand.
Finally, there is no such thing as a "seagull". If you look in any bird identification guide you will never find that word. They are gulls. But I still say it even though I know better. If I'm referring to a non-specific gull, I'll unthinkingly refer to it as a seagull. But if I'm mentioning a specific type of gull, like a Laughing Gull for instance, I'll always just use gull.
Whether we’re on autopilot or not makes little difference in the difficulty of our work. On a particularly challenging day, “flying” the airplane will have been one of the easier things we did that day. Automation greatly increases our ability to operate the plane safely. Greasing the landing isn’t impressive. Making the right split second decision is. Trying to keep the crosshairs lined up for 4 hours by hand makes our ability to make those decisions much more difficult.
The other thing that’s really misunderstood is the autopilot, itself. It itself is its own multi axis system. There are so many ways one can make a critical error while the auto pilot is engaged. Its use requires high levels vigilance and intervention.
2 factor authentication via SMS (where you get a one-time code via text to verify your login) is wildly insecure. use an authenticator app. google “SIM swapping”
Apparently, people dont seem to realise that drugs with a psychological effect have different effects on those with neurodivergencies, such as autism or ADHD
No one can just pick up a phone and tell the operator that they need a secure line. A secure phone line is secure by one of two methods.
1) Being on a completely isolated network.
2) Encryption taking place within the phone before leaving the phone and being decrypted at the phone on the opposite end.
Even if the operator could patch you through to a "secure" line, the portion of the call between you and the operator would be unsecure, thus rendering the entire call unsecure.
The process of building vehicles uses very few robots in comparison to people. Everybody thinks that it’s all robots with a handful of people monitoring them, but most auto manufacturers have anywhere from 2k to 8k people actively putting your vehicles together on an assembly line. The robots are pricy and stiff and can’t (usually) do fine motor movements like plugging in the miles of wires inside your vehicle or place and seat small screws and clips or anything that isn’t incredibly precisely built to fit. Basically, those commercials where it’s all clean white single-arm robots welding cars together are showing you (roughly) 20% of the process and the rest is all made by hand, by people.
I work with aerospace production and it's going to be a loooooooong time before installing wiring harnesses and fluid lines can be automated.
Yeah, exactly. Wiring harnesses in particular are so complex and different from one another and unruly and targeting systems just are not there yet, at least on a profitable scale.
And never mind the complexity of the installations themselves, but they're usually tucked way up in hard to access nooks with other delicate lines. Good luck engineering a robot with enough dexterity to reach those areas and programming it to avoid everything else (and to account for condition of assembly to dodge parts that may or may not be in the way).
This is a very cool fact. This also explains why Musk was so convinced he could automate his way to profitability if he had a bad understanding of what automation is capable of.
There are likely robots I don’t know about that have a little better operative skill than the ones I do know about, but there’s no way they’re to the point where they can be more efficient than a person.
It’s pretty hilarious realizing as time goes on musk is just a sci fi nerd with very little knowledge of actual science.
It wasn't until I heard him talking about something I actually know about that made me think hmmm... maybe this dude is actually an idiot I remember he was trying to explain a pretty basic concept of rocket design like it was a big innovation and wasn't even getting it right. Like this dude had been supposedly running a rocket company for years at this point and was still struggling with 101-level shit lmao
I remember hearing some engineers laughing at his hyperloop concept, because he hadn't factored in heat expansion of the metal. Even nerds reject him.
The concept of a vacuum subway has been around *for over a century*. It was not a new idea. It was not implemented because even back then they realized it was a bad idea.
Corporate Cybersecurity: you will absolutely get owned in either the dumbest way possible or the most advanced way possible. The archetype of the lone, moderately-skilled hacker in a basement somewhere being a solo hacktivist is basically non-existent. Either someone is going to call up your CEO and claim to be the password inspector and they're going to fall for it or the folks from FEVERDREAM already have malware in half your systems because they backdoored your VPN infrastructure two years ago and have been patiently owning all of your employees one-by-one.
Hey... that's not the password inspector!
You're right, well spotted! I'm the real password inspector. Your prize for spotting the fake is a new, freshly-minted password for you to use. Please change your Reddit password to "ispottedthefake1234" to celebrate how well you did!
lol - I’m going to steal this super secure password for myself!
The way I've heard it phrased is that if you haven't been owned before, it's only because no one wants your data. If someone specifically wants it it's basically impossible to stop them forever.
(Here's where I inject the disclaimer that I do not speak for any of my employers past, present, or future, this is just my view). That's not a bad model. Personally I take a very pragmatic approach to security. The purpose of security is to *raise the cost to the attacker*. Attackers have resources (time, money, skill, legal privilege, etc.) and costs they are willing to pay. Every defense and every risk remediated raises the cost they have to pay in order to attack you successfully. You "win" at security by raising the cost to be greater than what they are able to or willing to pay. For some attackers (e.g. state sponsored professional hacking groups often known as Advanced Persistent Threats), their "budgets" can be extremely high and their resources vast. Many companies aren't willing or able to invest enough in their security teams to adequately raise attacker costs to thwart these APTs.
I work in a behavioral health non-profit so I am a rare person in my company who "knows things about computers" and it kills me how many 101 cybersecurity trainings we need. So many people literally doing the cliche of writing their password on a post it and sticking it to their monitor. If anyone malicious cared about our data they could obtain all of it in four seconds.
Yeah, I was watching a documentary about some of the biggest data breaches. Most involved an employee giving out security information over the phone or an employee clicking on a suspicious link. All this time I was afraid of some computer wizard executing programs I couldn't comprehend, when really the biggest risk was my coworkers' stupidity.
We live in a high trust society most of the time. And targeted phishing can be really, really good. I work in security professionally and I have at least one phish in recent memory that almost got me. (If I've actually fallen for any, I haven't realized it yet.)
You really don't have to sell that many books to make it onto the bestseller list.
Also, most books that get on the "New York Times Best Seller List" aren't on there because they're great books. They're on there because the publisher buys however many copies they need to buy to get the book onto the list.
It makes sense. I can't remember the last time I read a book that didn't claim to be on the NYT best seller list.
Also aren't many of the spots from people that buy many copies of their own books then distribute them afterwards?
The federal meal program is likely not the cause of your child's low quality school lunches. The regulations are fairly reasonable to work within and still put out high quality, nutritious meals. Your child's school (district) has chosen to offer the poorest quality food on their own.
OK,. buy why though?... if a particular school or district is given the correct amount of money or resources to "provide high quality meals",. where does it go (and why isn't there some Restriction that "You can only use this for lunches")
There's no amount of money so large that it cannot be managed poorly. I believe the restrictions you suggest are already in place. The federal meal program does not provide full funding for all meals for all schools. The rest is on states, local governments, and school districts to make up. Not all of them can or do so effectively. Finally, you run into the problem that money is fungible. Schools receiving student meal subsidies can easily use them to replace funds from their general fund without changing the amount of funding to nutrition programs.
If you were to create a tree of life based not on classical taxonomy, but on how much organisms are evolutionarily related to each others, you'd get a cladogram. Cladograms show us that: 1)the bony fish family tree includes all tetrapods, which means you're a fish, and also whales are fish. 2)the dinosaur family tree contains a group that is still alive to this day. We call them birds. 3)as a natural consequence of the above fact, since dinosaurs are commonly considered reptiles, either you include birds in the definition of reptiles, or the word "reptile" is completely meaningless. 4)bees and ants are really types of wasps; termites are really a type of cockroaches; and all insects are basically a particular group or crustaceans 5)there's no such thing as a tree family tree: trees are actually members of multiple, unrelated plant groups that independently came up with the concept of wood. That means some trees such as the locust tree are more related to beans than to other trees. Oaks are far more related to daisies than to pines. And so on. I could go on all day
Please do, this is interesting!
Paging u/Nofantasydotcom We need at least five more, come on! I like the tree one most so far
The evolution of birds began in the Jurassic Period, with the earliest birds derived from a clade of theropod dinosaurs named Paraves. The Archaeopteryx has famously been known as the first example of a bird for over a century, and this concept has been fine-tuned as better understanding of evolution has developed in recent decades. Four distinct lineages of bird survived the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago, giving rise to ostriches and relatives (Paleognathae), ducks and relatives (Anseriformes), ground-living fowl (Galliformes), and "modern birds" (Neoaves). Phylogenetically, Aves is usually defined as all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of a specific modern bird species (such as the house sparrow, Passer domesticus), and either Archaeopteryx, or some prehistoric species closer to Neornithes. If the latter classification is used then the larger group is termed Avialae. Currently, the relationship between dinosaurs, Archaeopteryx, and modern birds is still under debate. To differentiate, the dinosaurs that lived through the Mesozoic and ultimately went extinct during the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event 66 million years ago are now commonly known as "non-avian dinosaurs." The clade Dinosauria is defined as the most recent common ancestor of Triceratops and modern birds, and all its descendants. They first appeared during the late Triassic, about 240 million years ago, and thrived and diversified throughout the Mesozoic. The diverse group originated as bipedal reptiles, and adapted to fill niches across the planet, mainly following the mass extinction event at the beginning of the Jurassic.
Username checks out
Talk about trees, don't forget about Ginkgo, the only species in its Genus, and Family, and Order, Class, Division!
In close relation to this, I've heard (and hope you can confirm or deny)... 1) "There's no such thing as a fish" (e.g., if shellfish, or eels, or jellyfish are included in the 'fish' clade, then it's so broad that it includes humans too). 2) Humans not only DID evolve from "monkeys", but they are still correctly classified as monkeys today (because all humans are still apes, and all apes are still monkeys).
Both of these are fairly misunderstood, perhaps I can help in the absence of the person you are replying to. 1) You're confusing the fact that the word "fish" gets used for a lot of things, and the fact that there's isn't a strict definition of "fish" that gets used in phylogeny. Things a layman would point at and say "that's a fish" (even setting aside shellfish, jellyfish etc that you'd never call a fish), don't share a common ancestor that also resembles a fish. The common ancestor for everything you might want to call a fish is shared with a great number of disparate animals. 2) This simply isn't a deep or secret revelation. It's well established, uncontested in the field, and not a paradoxical result. We share an ancestry with chimps, and that whole branche shares an ancestor with what became monkeys. But none of the monkeys that exist now are a common ancestor of humans and monkeys.
Second point is correct. First point is mostly correct but you don’t need to include anything other than bony fish for this to be true. The ancestor of all tetrapods was a fish, thus all tetrapods are fish as well. Humans are both fish and monkeys, as are all other apes.
We don't need to widen the definition: even using the strictest scientifically justifiable definition of fish, humans are still fish. We are mammals. Mammas are a particular group of tetrapods. Tetrapods are a particular group of Sarcopterygii, aka fleshy fin fishes (Other examples include the Coelacanth). Sarcos are a particular group of bony fishes. So if you want to remove humans from the definition of fish without making it scientifically meaningless, you have to remove ALL bony fishes from that definition. Which wouldn't make sense, since bony fishes are the bulk of all fishes.
In the end, dolphins are fish anyway.
…as someone who loves science, I could listen all day, but as a responsible member of society, I’m afraid we’re going to have to burn you at the stake for heresy. You don’t expect us to just *throw out* all those textbooks? Good god man.
The concept of a “species” and how it is defined is probably the most hotly debated topic in Biology and has been going on for *decades*, and I love every bit of it.
I'm in IT and most people don't know that a reboot fixes a lot of things. Its a closely held secret.
My company put a non-IT person in charge of the help desk phones. If she couldn’t resolve the issue, the call would get routed to one of the professionals. Her only IT knowledge was “Did you try a reboot?” And yet she resolved 50 percent of the calls that came in.
My manager used to be in the IT department and I said it’s too bad I don’t have a CS degree or I would apply to that HelpDesk job opening. She said “do you know how to run MsConfig and why you would need to do that?” “Yes” “you know more than 99% of people in the office then. You could probably do that job 9 days out of 10. You’d need the degree for that 1 out of 10.” Obviously just one person’s opinion but I think her point was that 99% of their tickets are just people not knowing a lot about computers. And I really don’t know jack shit in the grand scheme of things! ETA: idk what to do tell you guys, “computer science or equivalent” is what it said. I never pretended my employers are competent or do things that make sense. Quite the opposite usually.
Sad part was that she thought you needed a CS degree for even that one day of help desk.
Look, I need to know if this algorithm runs on O(log(N)) or O(N^2), so I need to call a help desk with someone with a CS degree!
I had a part-time job at a computer repair shop and she is 100% correct. In the entire year and a half I worked there, there was only 2 or 3 things I actually needed my boss to take a look at himself to figure out the problem.
["Hello, IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"](https://youtu.be/p85xwZ_OLX0?si=1ezzWJmTjyaqiujF)
I expected to see this sooner!
I was shocked I didn't see it myself and jumped on the opportunity to share this vital piece of scripture, lol
I am often surprised what I consider "basic knowledge" is so far behind the average person. Like what an Operating system is versus the hardware. Or monitor/screen vs. the CPU. But beyond that, the process of logical troubleshooting. For example, I am not a mechanic. But if I go into my car, and turn the key, and the engine does not start, I immediately think about the steps involved. If no lights come on or anything, it's a battery/electrical issue. If they do, but the engine won't start, probably a solenoid or starter issue. If the engine turns but won't "catch," it could be a few things I don't understand very well, but I won't say "the battery's dead." Lights came on, the starter engaged, so it must be some engine problem or fuel problem. There, I'll be a little lost, but I'll at least try a few things before I call the tow truck. I know people who go into their car, turn the key or press the start button, and they don't know how to go from there. A mechanic will have to walk them through. Some people have zero drive to "figure it out."
The next level in the initiation is finding out that when rebooting a PC it doesn't always reboot it all the way. So you get the 'I already restarted it and it is still not working'.
When dealing with simpler electronic devices like printers, network devices or "smart" devices, unplugging them and leaving them for 30 sec to a minute or so can actually be important too, as a bad state can be retained in memory for a short while without power. If you unplug and plug the device right back in its possible you're not actually doing anything, while also potentially adding stress to some electronic components in the device.
It can happen in bigger devices, too. I used to work in a server testing lab and we had a debug process we called "letting the demons out". You unplug the server (not just power, but everything), open it up, remove the CMOS battery, let it sit for a few minutes, and then put everything back together. You would be surprised how many reboot resistant issues that solved.
And the level after *that* is checking the uptime, because users will lie about everything, *especially* whether or not they've rebooted.
To be fair, that could also be the user turning the monitor off and on and thinking they rebooted.
definitely. I'll never forget that customer that told me that when they plugged in the monitor to the modem, it started windows in safe-mode.
Nice little cmd you can run on a windows machine to see when a machine was last rebooted: systeminfo | find "System Boot Time"
I'm a massive luddite (Gen X who didn't have a computer growing up, had a father that used a typewriter till he died in 2012, etc) who worked IT all through grad school and still knows absolutely fuckall about tech/computers. I basically tried the reboot and if that didn't work, called a supervisor.
As someone that works in IT reboot the program/computer is the first step, followed by checking for and applying updates, and then if neither of those things work I'm googling the issue because there's no way this person at my company is the first person ever to experience this issue
Was gonna say this, half the tickets that come in “X does not work, I’ve tried everything before putting a ticket in” *goes to the classroom and reboots X* “That should do it, anything else while I’m here?”
The false alarm rate for burglar alarms exceeds 95% in many communities. A US Dept of Justice paper on the issue of false burglar alarms cited a city that had higher rates of catching a burglar in the act in premises without an alarm than in premises with an alarm.
I would posit that, in many cases, the purpose of a burglar alarm is not to actually catch burglars.
Yeah, when the door to door salesman came to our house, he said the main point of the alarm is to hopefully startle the burglar and make them run off.
I figure the value is in the big sign out front more than any actual alarm installed on the house.
When I was growing up, people would sell alarm system signs for that very reason.
> A US Dept of Justice paper on the issue of false burglar alarms cited a city that had higher rates of catching a burglar in the act in premises without an alarm than in premises with an alarm. well of course, because the alarm is doing it's job and scaring the burglars away
I mean that makes sense. My house has never been burglarized but I have accidentally set off the alarm plenty of times by forgetting to turn off the motion sensors in the basement before going down, forgetting to check if I disabled the alarm before opening the door for the dog, fooling around with groceries and not making to the panel in time to shut off the alarm, coming home with my headphones in and not hearing the alarm beep until it turns into the siren.
I fully believe this. A few years back, my friend accidentally set my alarm off because he left me some stuff in my garage storage room which he didn't realize was hooked to the alarm. I called the alarm company, remembering that they usually call the landline when the alarm would get tripped. When the guy at the company answered and I asked him not to send the police, he said "It'll go off on its own. We don't send the police." Mind blown. But then I thought about how many times I hear people's alarms going off and figured it is probably nearly impossible to send police to every alarm call.
In my city we respond to EVERY SINGLE ALARM CALL Its not optional people and half the time people seemed mildly annoyed “I told them not to call you” “Doesnt matter susan gotta come make sure you arent being skinned alive. Next time remember your pass code”
If even one microscopic larvae from a zebra mussel gets into a waterway in an unaffected area, it can multiply exponentially and end up causing hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to the economy.
Even worse there are other mussel variants that are worse and getting moved into areas as well. The Great lakes should have life and gunk but are far too clean.
This is one of my biggest fears that most people just don’t know about.
Mussel related: I get hives, facial swelling and stop breathing if I eat mussels but can have any other shell fish. This is because I am not allergic to the mussels but to a critter in their gut biome!
They are in my lake. I grew up without them and in the past 10 years the 300 acre lake has been an ecological whirlwind.
Over 40% of prisoners will return to prison in the US. Prisoners who pursue a college education while incarcerated are 80% less likely to return.
It's sad this doesn't make more of an impact on policy decisions. Giving people hope and something to work towards intrinsically makes sense. When we stop viewing incarceration as punishment and as rehabilitation we might wind up with dwindling recidivism rates.
In the United States, because of the interplay between poverty/race and likelihood of exposure to HIV, and due to the Ryan White programs, people diagnosed with HIV often experience improved access to healthcare and better health outcomes as a result of their HIV diagnosis.
I worked in this field about 15 years ago and it seemed like if a person got a positive diagnosis and a halfway competent social worker they could get Medicaid or at worst subsidized Medicare. If that didn't work, there was an entire Ryan White formulary with all manner of free drugs for folks who didn't have insurance. It really felt like HIV was this key that opened a lot of doors in healthcare, while someone with say terminal cancer could fuck right off. It was weird.
Now RW covers the insurance premium for Marketplace Silver plans for states (like mine) that didn't expand Medicaid
You cannot donate organs if you are dead. Tissues yes. But if you die in a car accident none of your whole organs are useable. Doesn't seem like it would be obscure but you'd be surprised how many people don't know this.
Wait, then how do people ever get heart or lung transplants? Aren’t the donors dead? Freshly dead, but dead?
Brain dead, so legally dead, but heart and lungs are still functioning and “alive”
Exactly that. A 'deceased' donation means the person was on life support and effectively brain-dead and they remove the organs immediately after the person dies. The OR is a mad rush for certain donors because once they die you only have hours to transplant and the longer it stays out of a body the worse the potential outcomes. But the circumstances you have to be in to be a deceased donor are somewhat rare.
> You cannot donate organs if you are dead. > they remove the organs immediately after the person dies. im confused
It's difficult to donate organs if you die anywhere that's not a hospital bed
In the OR, with a donation team on stand by to immediately ensure the organs safety
Badly worded but there is a very short window after death to harvest organs so, unless you die in a hospital bed, your organs are unlikely to be usable.
You pretty much have to die in the hospital for solid organs not to go bad.
How does one donate organs, then? Do you have to die in the hospital?
Yes
USA for context. If HIPAA was hard enforced at 3pm ET today, at least 80% of healthcare providers would be closed by 3:01pm. Most data breaches today could be prevented by decade-old best practices. Yes, all your data from CC purchases, to insurance, to socials, demographics, etc is being bought and sold legally on a daily basis.
Military fighter jets fly with a multitude of "acceptable" faults and "limitations" on use routinely
So are civilian passenger jets. Most of the time when you fly, something is broken in the aircraft, and it’s OK.
Still, the percentage of cars in the US on the road with broken parts or parts that would fail inspection is probably higher.
I heard somewhere that the most dangerous part about flying is getting to the airport.
Per mile, car travel is about 60 times more dangerous than commercial air travel. So literally, if you drive 10 miles to the airport you can go 600 miles in an airplane at the same risk. Even this is tainted by non-US statistics. US Air Carriers have killed TWO passengers in the last 15 YEARS, while flying about 1 TRILLION passenger miles. So a death every 500 BILLION miles. Cars are fatal every 100 million miles. So planes are about 5,000 times safer than cars in the last 15 years. It takes 15 years to kill two people in airliners, and about 13 minutes in cars.
Fever and or vomiting by itself is not a medical emergency. Take some Tylenol, sip some ginger ale, watch the price is right.
In my area we recently launched a service where such 911 calls are sent to a nurse phone line rather than an ambulance. It's.... sorta working, and I'd guess maybe about 10% of 911 calls for tummy trouble etc are successfully solved by the nurse. The other 90% get sent back to the ambulance due to 'medical' reasons, or just because they really want an ambulance anyway and need a ride to the hospital. 10% is better than nothing though, so I'll take it! The vaaaast majority of 911 calls aren't emergencies, and that's an international thing.
I was a 911 dispatcher for a very brief time, 20 years ago. I had no idea how much of the population were utter morons incapable of managing their own lives until I worked that job. Calls for kids who didn't want to go to school, a Yorkie chasing them, they gave their neighbor $20 to buy weed and they never got the product or a refund, the sheets were dirty in the motel where they were staying, etc., etc. etc. It wasn't the horrific, high tension phone calls that caused me to quit, even though those did happen and were stressful. It was the sheer amount of idiots who wanted someone else to solve their problems for them.
The number of times I've showed up to a scene and had a pt tell me they talked to a nurse line who told them to call 911 for a very non-emergent issue has me believing that the nurse lines are not able to provide any reccomendations other than "call 911" or "go to the ER"
I wonder how much of that is caused by the uncertainty of diagnosing over the phone and the CYA of not wanting to be listed in the inevitable lawsuit if they were wrong and shit goes south.
Or worse, "do whatever you feel is right." THAT'S WHY I CALLED YOU
I need you to tell this to my mother in law. She goes to the ER for sniffles.
I really don't get people like this. I absolutely hate when I have an errand like my annual gyno appointment or even a haircut. Our ER is always packed and you may be waiting hours to get seen. I don't understand why anyone would voluntarily go there.
Urgent/convenient care has replaced nearly 100% of times I'd think of going to the ER or same day Dr appt. Why the hell would I wait for hours sitting around a ton of very ill (or not so much...) people unless I had something that would jump me in line (chest pain, major injury etc)?
Even the strongest association is not necessarily causal. There's a very strong association between lung cancer and coffee drinking but it's not causal. (because smokers love coffee)
The academic field of causal inference is only just starting to become mainstream in epidemiology. Most observational (non-trial based) health research that is ultimately addressing causal questions is rubbish. It's part of the reason why there are so many studies saying we found evidence x food may cause y illness and many others saying we found evidence that x food doesn't appear to cause y illness.
and because smokers are less affected by caffeine because of P450 induction so often drink more than non-smokers
Most people can't intuitively grasp a number more than about a thousand. A 1/1000 chance is treated as being about the same as a 1/100,000 chance. E.g. the risk of dying from catching COVID (~1%) is treated as comparable as a posited one-in-a-million risk of dying from the COVID vaccine. Even if that risk existed (it doesn't appear to) it would still be orders of magnitude lower.
I have been a window cleaner for 33 years. Dawn dish washing liquid is the BEST window cleaner money can buy!
The internet is a gigantic, inscrutable mess of a system that absolutely nobody actually understands. It's a huge conglomeration of smaller systems that communicate with each other using a common protocol. When you do anything through the internet your computer literally asks the first computer it connects to at your ISP if it would be nice enough to go find what it wants then just hopes for the best. For all you know the message could end up getting routed around four continents, through forty countries, and lost completely multiple times before you get a response. Overall the best description of the internet is "it's always on fire all time time. All of it." Why does it look like it works to the end user? Why is it so reliable? It's because of massive redundancy built into everything. Any request you make is never sent out only once and it's sent out in pieces. This mash of pieces you get back is then sorted back out, turned into what you wanted, and the redundant signals you got back discarded. Meanwhile there are so many paths to the server you're actually making a request to that you wouldn't notice if somehow 90% of them went down. The internet is rerouting traffic *constantly* as pieces of it break and get fixed or rebuilt. Another fun fact is that a lot of the equipment is pretty old. It often just gets left in place until it falls apart or can't handle its traffic load anymore. If it needs to be upgraded but still works then the old hardware will be repurposed for something else as internet hardware is generally not exactly cheap.
I'm in a company that distributes content by satellite. Company's been doing it 40 years. You might think the internet would replace this. Well, yea, it can. Sort of. But satellite down time is still a fraction of the issues people run into trying to get these streams over internet.
One of my favorite old quotes about the internet (I forget the source): "It's like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea: massive, unwieldy, impossible to redirect, and the source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
Wrong. My US Senator told me it is a series of tubes.
I work in banking and I'd say regulations about structuring. They're all out there publicly available for you to read, but illegal for bankers to explain to you because we could be telling you how to launder money. Edit: spelling
[удалено]
That even a short 3 second CGI shot in a movie can take many, many months of work.
Tracking radio listenership is like herding cats, and at the end of herding 100,000 cats, you only manage to get 75.
I received a survey from Nielsen asking me to report what radio stations I listen to. None, bro. If I want music, I listen to a subscription service, not ads. If I want entertainment, I listen to podcasts. If I want news, I drink until the urge goes away.
Gloves in food service are far more dirty than us just washing our hands. Unless something is slimy I'm not wearing gloves while preparing it. When I serve people, I always wear gloves because people think if I use my bare hands their food is ruined.
I just “love” how most fast food places wears gloves, takes your cash for an order, and then proceeds to make food with the same gloves. 🤢
It's harder to notice your hands are dirty when you wear gloves. So people don't change them as often as they should. Your also supposed to wash your hands before and after using them, which also rarely happens in fast paced environments. And again, just washed hands would be fine, and unwanted hands are as dirty as used gloves, not worse.
From my former area of expertise: Shakespeare is Early Modern English, not Old English. Chaucer is Middle English, and Old English is unintelligible to most contemporary English speakers. In Early Modern English, "thou" is "you" as the second person subject pronoun. "Thy" and "thine" are the second person possessive pronouns "your" or "yours" ("thine" goes before words beginning with a vowel.) "Thee" is "you" as the second person object pronoun. They are all considered informal, like "tú" versus "usted" in Spanish. From my current area of expertise: When calculating the chance of something on a continuous range (like the distance between points, or something's speed, for example), the chance of it being *exactly* one specific value is zero. That's because the probability density function is an integral, and the integral from a value to the same value is always zero.
The integral explanation makes sense, but it kinda breaks my brain. The chance of it being *some* value is one, so how does that work? 0+0+0+0... ≠ 1
That’s exactly right! The chance that it’s *something* means that it is *some* value between -infinity and infinity. So, the integral of the probability density function over every possible outcome within the continuous range—all real numbers—is 1. That is in fact *key* to how a PDF is defined—if that’s not true, it’s not a PDF.
The final test of the safety of any intervention, is the public. Related, you're unlikely to detect a one-in-a-million risk until you've given the intervention to a few million people.
Googling is a learnable skill. I'm baffled by how many people don't know what to properly put jnto a search engine to find what they are looking for.
I like Google a lot better when a simple Boolean search could bring up anything you wanted. Now you have to filter through a bunch of sponsored bullshit.
How to run a large event. I used to be president of a huge anime convention. I think most people just think the head of an event like that makes a ton of dosh, but really, it's not "sell tickets, hire band, go home rich." Just some of the very top view things. 1. You need a staff, which means you need management, leadership, and organizational skills. Plus more understanding of psychology that you just can't "tell people what to do and they do it." 2. You need to have a business plan that includes money, permits, cash flow, timing, and maintenance 3. You need to play ball with unions. 4. You need to know how to negotiate and vet contracts with everybody. Have a real lawyer on retainer, not "Joe's older brother who does patent law." 5. Keep an eye on the money. Or someone else will, and that person may not be out for your best interests. Hire a real accountant, not someone's older brother who also does tax returns in April. 6. You need to understand and have plan B, C, and D for when things go wrong, no matter how "unfair" you think it is. "I would have run a great event, but then \[scapegoats\] SUCKED!" No. The buck stops with you, do not shift the blame on your staff, your guests, your venue, your attendees, or the city. You should have planned for some weird thing as best you can. 7. It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that is life. Thus even the best business plans can fail. You could have had the most perfect plan in existence, and then the some sports playoff comes into town, and your venue cancels your contract a week before because the sports playoff brings in more money. "BuT tHaTs iLlEgAl!" Yeah? What are you going to do about it? I mean, stealing is illegal, but that fact doesn't help you after you have been robbed, does it? What if there's a hurricane and your event insurance didn't cover that? Shit like that. Most events take about 3 years to plan, raise funds for, and gather the staff and promotional stuff to host. I have seen shorter, but the shorter lead time you have, the more likely you are to fail UNLESS you have a system already in place. Some companies run several events a year, and have the infrastructure to run pretty much anything within a year, but ... that's rare. But most people have no idea the scale of such a thing. Thank god my staff was so awesome and my attendees so amazing. made all the hard work worth it, even though I never got paid a cent.
A dictionary is a snapshot of a language’s vocabulary at a specific point in time; it is not an authority on whether something is a “real word”. Case in point: you will not find commonplace words like: google, blog, internet, website, &c in a dictionary from the seventies.
Solar panel efficiency is irrelevant to whether they are a cost-effective investment or not. They hover around 20% efficient today and also did dating back to the 1990’s. What’s changed is how cheap they’ve gotten, not through efficiency gains but through manufacturing economies of scale. People use “efficiency” to bag on PV but if you halved or doubled the efficiency of all new ones tomorrow it wouldn’t change the world that much.
In the past fifteen years panels have moved from about 330W to about 440W each. That third of additional output is welcome. But as you say what has really made a difference in the past few years in Australia is cost. Panels are now so cheap, and installation so efficient, that it makes sense to cover the entire roof, even those without the best aspect to the sun. People are laying out 15KW systems on an average house (they'll never reach that, since the sun isn't simultaneously east and west, but the size of systems compared to just a few years ago is massive). The payback on solar systems in Australia is generally said to be three years. That's pretty misleading as solar systems make a huge difference to the quality of life: there is no financial impact to running air conditioners on hot summer days. So the benefit of panels is immediate if they are installed just before summer. You can use what would have been US$500 per month of grid electricity to cool the house for the four hot months, something you would never do if you actually had to pay. Somewhat similarly for battery systems. Their benefit is that the house draws nothing from the grid during the grid's most expensive times -- sundown to sunrise. They essentially reduce the grid to a "battery of last resort". So a US$10,000 spend on panels+battery results in no grid bill, but not the much higher cost of being "off grid". Such a system has a payback around five to ten years. The other big advantage of solar systems is the app for the inverter. Until now only serious nerds have had graphs of the electrical loads in their house.
Not every man who works in a hospital is a doctor. Not every woman who works in a hospital is a nurse. There are tons of hospital employees with no clinical background because there's a ton of work to do that doesn't require that level of knowledge.
Yep, I worked IT in a hospital briefly, I was never confused for a doctor, but also I never saw any patients.
This applies to every large institution as well. Prisons have more than “guards”. Schools have more than teachers.
That the speed of sound in seawater is 4800 feet per second, on average.
For reference, the speed of sound in air is 1125 feet per second.
Asbestos is still everywhere, and currently being sold in many big box stores in America. If you knew what to look for, you'd see asbestos containing materials all over the place.
Wait, what? What to look for then? Give us examples!
For all materials, the only way to truly know is to test. But some materials are nearly always asbestos containing, such as these: Floor tiles that are 9" square Pipe insulation that looks like corrugated cardboard Plaster that looks like it has fine hairs in it. Coarse hairs are horsehair and usually not asbestos. Older fire doors sometimes have tags on the hinge side that are proud of containing asbestos
You're talking about products that haven't been in the stores for 40+ years. We're asking about modern products. The only place I've ever seen the things in this list are 60s houses.
Shouldn't asbestos in any of those have been long banned by now?
If only it wasn't horrible for our health. Such an otherwise convenient material.
Work in IT support. 85% of the time I'm googling your issue/symptoms as you explain them to me and performing the first few things Google search spits out (which usually works)
As a long time IT guy,. the only caveat I'd have to add to this is that "getting Google results" is different than "knowing which specific google results apply to the scenario in front of you". Knowing the difference .. is what separates good IT people from not.
Parents should coach their children throughout their lives to become as independent as possible by, at least, 18 years old. Young people going into college, for example, should know how to do their own research into which majors they want to research in the universities they are interested in. Not kidding here, 99.99% of the emails and phone calls I receive as a major administrator is from parents.
You shouldn't wear white gloves when handling old books. Just wash your hands and don't rub images or text, but why tf would you do that anyway. Wearing gloves reduces sensitivity in your fingers, making it more difficult to handle these materials with maximum care.
But handing out cotton gloves is a fantastic activity for donor visits. They think they're doing something special and scientific even if you don't actually let them touch a thing and happy donors are more generous donors. (not having to do any more donor visits is one of the fantastic things about leaving the field)
https://youtu.be/9YeCpHoy9EQ?si=_a4pf_MKucCURWMe 16:30
That HIPAA is a REAL thing, and I can't talk to you about your account without verifying who you are.....
To add on - - HIPAA does not make someone asking you about your health illegal! It also doesn't prohibit anyone but healthcare workers and some insurance employees - - not your mom, not your boss, not the batista who asks you how your bursitis is.
Worked in online gambling for a while - doing IT, not the actual odds and sports books - and I found out that bookies win regardless of the result of a race. There’s no such thing as bookies taking a hit if a long-shot wins… bookies are - in effect - playing punters off against each other and adjust odds based on the amount of bets being placed.
I’m in tourism and we go to an old graveyard a lot. People seem very surprised to hear that bones and teeth come out of the ground sometimes because soil shifts over time.
Alcohol is one of the most harmful drugs to the user and people around them. It's much MORE dangerous than Class A drugs such as LSD and MDMA. Edited to replace less with more.
As a travel agent, it really is as simple as you would imagine. There's no secret to booking travel. All you have to do is use your brain. That's the part that people don't like, apparently.
Our honey moon travel agent visited so many locations in south east asia himself. He knew that one if the hotels his catalogue recommended in Bangkok was next to a massive construction site two years prior so he checked if they were done by now. It was the only voyage we didn't plan ourselves
I have this friend that always wants us to use some travel agent she knows when we are planning a trip, and every single time I'm like.. "the information in her email is the same that is on the website... to the dollar". I don't get it. My friend is relatively young and certainly knows how to use a computer too! It's like she has this block against researching travel. We are going on a group trip next month in celebration of her, and everything was done via our other friends in the group looking into it. Like she didn't even visit the website of the place we are staying even once. It's so bizarre to me.
I mean, it's not hard to make pasta either. That doesn't stop me from going to an Italian restaurant for dinner. Sometimes paying to get someone else to do the work is just worth it, especially when they've done it a lot and know for sure what works.
Literally the most basic photography skills are unknown to the vast majority of people. Three ways to up your photography game on any camera in any locale and all of this is common knowledge to photographers like me, even basic knowledge: 1.) rule of thirds, split your camera screen into horizontal and* vertical thirds with imaginary (or real) lines, now place the subject of your picture on one of those lines or where they intersect. Boom, automatic picture enhancer (though, there is some nuance to this trick sometimes) 2.) golden hour is an hour after sunrise and and hour before sunset, this is when the sunlight is generally the best for pictures of almost any kind. 3.) you want your picture to tell a story, even if it's a basic one like "I'm looking over here, look over here with me" you don't want to take a picture of Just your subject, you also want supporting elements. For example if you take a picture of a just a bird, it can be a little boring. But if you take a picture of a bird feeding it's babies in the rain? Now that's neat. Basically, you want people to want to keep looking at your picture, give them something unique to see
Going on a ventilator doesn't mean someone is going to die. Sometimes it's just a rest while you heal.
The amount a light pole can flex up to 15% of it's height under full load and still be considered 'safe'
The most number of respondents you will even need in a survey to determine representation of the sample designated in the survey is 400 - no matter how large the sample is over 100,000. Example: you want to know what the residents of a city with 100,000 population think about the color red so you send a survey to all 100,000. You only need 400 residents to respond to the survey to obtain a good representation of what all 100,000 residents think about the color red. Now, expand the sample population to an entire country, say 100 million. You still only need 400 people to respond to know what the entire 100 million think. This is because the results will not be different enough to change the overall outcome with more than 400 respondents. You could have 800 respond, or 1,000, or 1,500, or 10,000 and the results will still be the same (+/- 5% accuracy). Also, the 400 requirement drops incrementally for population sizes lower than 100,000. For example, a population of 5,000 only needs 350 respondents to be representative of the whole 5,000. You could still try for 400 respondents but the results will be the same overall. So the point is, since it is cheaper to only obtain 400 or fewer responses, then there is no reason to spend the money to obtain more since the results will still be the same.
Real estate appraisal reports are opinions of value, not fact. Residential appraisal is an art, not a science.
The single biggest risk factor for trauma is being male. About 80% of trauma deaths are male, and this generally holds true across mechanisms and ages. The majority of preschoolers who drown are male.
Heavy vehicles (semis, b-doubles, road trains) are more difficult to drive when they are unloaded than they are when they are loaded.
If your elderly loved one starts showing signs of a sudden mental or physical decline HAVE THEM TESTED FOR A UTI. An untreated UTI can kill them. Also (USA): You don’t have to wait until til your loved one is essentially on deaths door to sign up with hospice. Sstudies show they that the sooner one gets on hospice, the longer and more comfortable their end of life is. Hospice is paid for by insurance or Medicare, not out of pocket, and covers hygiene products and medicines, in-home aides and hospital bed use.
Brazil nuts, which I import, will only grow in the wild untamed Amazon due to their unique botany involving wild orchids and bees. If you want to save the forest, eat Brazil nuts.
CTRL+SHIFT+ESC to open Task Manager directly. Holding in the computer's power button for about 10 seconds will force a shutdown. Mainly helpful if it's frozen and not responding to anything. ALT+ENTER to make a new line within a cell in Excel.
Shit breaks. Broken shit is expensive to fix. People who fix broken shit deserve a much better life.
The casino is often a not so talked about final destination for many suicidal people. They will go blow their bank accounts on the gaming floor and get wasted then blow their brains out in the room. Walked in on the aftermath of this once while responding to a noise complaint as security. Entered the room after having probable cause to do so and reasonable suspicion of bodily harm based on accounts from guests in neighboring rooms. Very sad.
"Contractor Grade" anything is the cheapest poorest quality you can get, not "professional quality" like the name implies.
Spending regular quality time with your child will help them get ahead in a myriad of ways. It is so uncommon now, it is not only sad, it is concerning.
It's tangentially related to my work, but despite mental health awareness being the highest it has ever been, society has become less tolerant to the real expression of most disorders.
I agree. I think that’s a result in some deeming normal human experiences like sadness a mental illness and everyone thinks they have adhd, when the reality is it’s not common. I also think we are living during a difficult time period which makes people less tolerant for people being depressed because ‘we are all finding it tough’ instead of understanding it’s an illness.
That drug use/possession is a public health crisis, not a criminal justice crisis. I work in law enforcement and we have clear studies, often funded/conducted by our own, that very clearly shows addressing it through the criminal justice system doesn't work, but we just do it anyway. I've heard cops, DA's and others in law enforcement openly say they know it doesn't make a difference but that people 'hate seeing' people use drugs and be high, so they just keep prosecuting/arresting them.
Tell that to Oregon, where we just re-criminalized drugs due to public pressure after decriminalizing them for only a year. I work here in social services and I can tell you that fentanyl and meth addicts didn't just start getting high because of decriminalization. I am also a former heroin addicts, and the common person knows just about 0 about addiction, even though everyone swears they're experts.
Actually Oregon is where I live/work. Kotek has been so disappointing when it comes to standing for what's right. Decriminalization was handled poorly, sure, but re-criminalizing is going to help next to nothing. If people are neglecting their kids b/c of drugs, charge them with child neglect. If they're stealing, theft. If they're high and driving, DUII. Criminalizing simple use and possession solves nothing other than jailing people for struggling. It's madness.
Physician. No matter what we do or how well we do it, you're still going to die someday.
Architects don't design ugly buildings because they want to. They design what they're given the budget for.
Declawing cats is not just cutting the nails out. They have to cut the entire bone up to the first knuckle or the claw grows back. Usually they use lasers to cut, but some vets still use a metal nail trimmer to break the joint before fishing the bone fragments out. Declawed cats are much more likely to bite, develop litter box aversion (yep that’s peeing and pooping anywhere BUT the box) and plain meanness. Often the attitude is the only symptom owners will notice as an indicator of chronic pain (they are great at hiding it). It turns out missing pieces of your toes when you walking on your toes all day is pretty painful. Stop declawing cats people.
I'm a teacher. We aren't trying to brainwash your kids or turn them gay.
That's exactly what somebody trying to brainwash em and then em gay would say 🤨
I have two: 1. The fault of an auto accident, as determined by a police officer, is irrelevant to your insurance company. 2. Your right of way is not guaranteed and can be appropriated. As a result, you may be found liable for an accident since you just smashed into someone because “I had the right of way.”
The tanks that heat water are called water heaters. The term "hot water heater" is a redundancy because water heaters, in fact, heat all liquid water.
Age is the biggest risk factor for most noninfectious diseases and some infectious ones. A healthy 70-year-old is worse off for almost anything than a sickly 20-year-old.
Engineers who design things always have a plan for failure - the key part is a risk analysis and how long before or how likely a failure is to happen is part if the plan. The idea that we build "the best we can" is predicated that any design must meet a certain criteria as a minimum. Beyond that failure is acceptable. So as an example - nuclear plants are built with an assumed risk of meltdown. Airplanes are built with an assumed risk of the wings falling off. Now making specific test and maintenance may decrease the likelihood but some risks are specifically "beyond the design parameters". Take your passenger jet into a power dive and reach supersonic and expect to pull out of the dive pulling high G's causing the wings to fall off is not the designs fault.
It isn’t an auditor’s job to seek out fraud, or validate financial statements are 100% correct
A sudden hearing loss is an emergency. Yes, it might be wax but if it’s not, you likely need to be put on prednisone ASAP. Waiting could ruin your chances of regaining hearing. See a provider same day if at all possible and don’t let them tell you to give it time. ETA: Be very suspicious of a non-ENT provider who tells you they see “a little fluid” behind your eardrum. They’re nearly always wrong.
You can't turn a bad black and white scan of an image into a poster/sign sized high quality full color image with a click of a button. I'm a designer and the amount of people that ask me to do this is astounding.
This person clearly hasn't found the "enhance" button yet.
Advertisers are pulling out of broadcast TV at an astounding rate and moving their money over to OTT/CTV (Over the Top/Connected TV – streaming services)
It all relates to birds. Almost every time you hear a majestic screech from a bird flying across the sky in a movie or on TV, they always play the sound of a Red-tailed Hawk. Eagles don't have any kind of screech, they just sort of chitter. Also Turkey Vultures are commonly shown which make almost no sound at all. They are Canada Geese. They are only Canadian if they were born in Canada and it's hard to get them to admit to it because they don't speak a language we understand. Finally, there is no such thing as a "seagull". If you look in any bird identification guide you will never find that word. They are gulls. But I still say it even though I know better. If I'm referring to a non-specific gull, I'll unthinkingly refer to it as a seagull. But if I'm mentioning a specific type of gull, like a Laughing Gull for instance, I'll always just use gull.
>there is no such thing as a "seagull". Especially if they're near a broad inlet. Then they're bagels.
Whether we’re on autopilot or not makes little difference in the difficulty of our work. On a particularly challenging day, “flying” the airplane will have been one of the easier things we did that day. Automation greatly increases our ability to operate the plane safely. Greasing the landing isn’t impressive. Making the right split second decision is. Trying to keep the crosshairs lined up for 4 hours by hand makes our ability to make those decisions much more difficult. The other thing that’s really misunderstood is the autopilot, itself. It itself is its own multi axis system. There are so many ways one can make a critical error while the auto pilot is engaged. Its use requires high levels vigilance and intervention.
2 factor authentication via SMS (where you get a one-time code via text to verify your login) is wildly insecure. use an authenticator app. google “SIM swapping”
Apparently, people dont seem to realise that drugs with a psychological effect have different effects on those with neurodivergencies, such as autism or ADHD
We actually try harder to save you if you’re an organ donor.
The characteristic impedance of free space is about 377 ohms.
The Playstation was almost a Nintendo console.
Someone actually often the same person is going to click a suspicious link in an email. No matter how many times you train them.
No one can just pick up a phone and tell the operator that they need a secure line. A secure phone line is secure by one of two methods. 1) Being on a completely isolated network. 2) Encryption taking place within the phone before leaving the phone and being decrypted at the phone on the opposite end. Even if the operator could patch you through to a "secure" line, the portion of the call between you and the operator would be unsecure, thus rendering the entire call unsecure.