ebrenes

So, you're reinforcing their point that the producers can take actions to attempt to address the problem. Actions which Sony has not undertaken in this instance.

I don't live in New York City, but when I was there Uber was the absolute best option for our use case, because they were the only option that allowed us to ask for a toddler carseat as an extra. It was a game changer and preferred that over taxis and other car services.

I also remember a period in time when I could use Trillian to connect to ICQ, MSM, AIM and have it all in one convenient chat client without having to fire up all the individual ones. Granted it sometimes broke when the protocols updated, but for a moment it was pretty cool.

That no one remembers what it's like having an office is the system working as intended. The open office layout is meant to reduce costs as it's cheaper to cram more people in fewer square meters of physical space. It's also cheaper to reorganize teams/furniture in an open office layout.

Plus, it allows managers to look over their demesne unimpeded.

That's really regressive. My sister-in-law works for HPE and she instead got a work from home bonus added to her paycheck. Instead of having companies offload their costs to employees like some late-stage capitalist dystopia they should compensate employees for providing the infrastructure themselves.

In some jurisdictions this is actually required, if the company is to expect any level of service or availability from infrastructure on the employer's home. For example, if your personal internet fails you cannot be held liable or at fault by an employer, since they're not paying for that. And if they pay for it, then it's on them to fix it since it's the service they provided (just like it's not an employee's fault if the internet gets cut at the office).

I wouldn't go that far. The feeling I'm getting from their responses are of someone that appreciates the nuance and details of social interactions. As someone who lacks that detailed appreciation, this stood out for me.

It was like reading an audiophile describe what I previously thought were a perfectly serviceable set of headphones in less than stellar terms, while realizing they're probably right, but still cognizant that those short-comings did not affect my use of those headphones, in particular.

In which case, it wouldn't be done through a drop of blood, as Theranos advertised. It will be done through those undiscovered "magical" means (in the sufficiently advanced levels of technology are akin to magic manner of speaking) that currently elude our understanding both technical and theoretical.

Yet such information is incredibly lacking and hard to find. You would think the Vatican and similar would have all this information ready to be digested by people interested in learning, yet it's incredibly hard to find if it's available.

That worked really well with the beached whale!

If a person were so concerned about not being a Trump supported, like you mentioned they could have abstained or voted for some other person that's not Trump. At the end, voting for Trump is support for Trump no matter what convoluted logic was used to arrive at that decision.

Another factor is that the black people that were mainly affected by the segregation were the primary funders of the bus system. Their boycott was incredibly significant to the bottom line.

Read the article completely or the comments. Your question has been addressed multiple times in this thread.

Which is really all that most countries are doing. In doing so also they're buying time by decreasing the number of people that get infected per unit of time, thus increasing the likelihood that more people will be infected later when possibly better treatment options exist and/or a vaccine.

It's not unheard of and some work has been done to study if this would be beneficial (with promising results)[1]:

But I offer as evidence two papers[2] in 2005, one in Nature and one in Science. They both did mathematical modeling with influenza, to see whether saturation with just Tamiflu of an area around a case of influenza could stop the outbreak. And in both cases, it worked.

[1] https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-interview-larry-bril...

[2] Journal references: Nature (DOI: 10.1038/nature04017) and Science (DOI:10.1126/science1115717)

But every metric used by colleges is to measure what you termed "scholastic actuality":

- School grades: if you didn't get the GPA you're already out of the running in many colleges

- Extracurricular Activities: if you didn't actually participate, then no one is going to look at how you might have done if you had participated

- College Essay: if you can't write you're not going to get any points here, no matter the potential you might have to eventually write something amazing

I don't see why the SAT should focus on some ethereal "potential" when everything else is centered on the current reality and not potential. Colleges aren't looking for the completely unrefined ore, they're looking for a diamond in the rough that needs to be cut and polished if you will. Not a bucket of rocks that are very likely to contain a diamond.

The SATs have a top score, if it were easy to game you'd find many people would clump at the top. That would make it impossible to normalize that distribution into a bell-shape because they're all clustered into the same bucket with no way of spreading them.

OP's point was that the perfect scores remain consistently outside of people's grasp despite the variety of resources available to prep for the exam. I only once managed to hit perfect score and my other best scores were one or two questions off. I had been taking the test since I was 11 (for various extracurricular camps/activities) and prepped multiple times for them. The biggest scores jumps were more closely related with my age and academic achievements than anything else.

Can they filter out my clicky mechanical keyboard?

Someone with a bit more knowledge, but isn't this basically correct, despite how moronic it sounds. Yesterday I was looking at California's critical sector list[1] and it seems stores like GameStop would be covered as critical infrastructure at a first glance.

And it listed the following:

    Retail (e.g., retail centers and districts, shopping malls).[2]

[2] https://www.cisa.gov/commercial-facilities-sector

I'm honestly very conflicted now that you mention this. Yesterday some friends hit me up to donate to a gofundme page to support getting masks for a hospital a friend works at. It's a state university hospital with hundreds of millions in endowment in a red state.

It's easy to become jaded and cynical, but I'm beginning to believe this is the wake up call a lot of people need and anything less than an unmitigated disaster will be converted into a win to all these science denying, public health de-funding radicals running some governments.

It's probably the stress, anxiety and anger at the impotence caused by all this, but I can't help but feel a desire to lash out those people who have made things worse.

France just closed down all schools and universities...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-12/france-cl...

I was not working on fixing Y2K issues, but I did notice the impact it had on systems that hadn't been patched. It's the typical IT conundrum, when you do a good job no one notices and you don't get rewarded for doing a good job; the only recognition comes when things fail.

Some historians seem to think that it was a real crisis in which the US pioneered solutions that were used across the world: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/12/30/lessons-yk...

The issue is that any competent law firm will pull up articles and comments by officials stating that warm weather will dampen or hinder COVID-19 spread. They would only need to pull up a video of Trump stating as much and make a case that it's "reasonable" to believe the president.

And even more serious sources basically say: "we don't know at this time", which is not enough to make these actions criminal (as per current laws, per my limited unprofessional understanding).

The estimate of how many deaths might be undiagnosed might be speculation, but it has already happened in Seattle that COVID deaths were misattributed to seasonal flu. In both cases, the death and symptoms will look identical the difference being in the underlying virus causing the issues.

"In fact, officials would later discover through testing, the virus had already contributed to the deaths of two people, and it would go on to kill 20 more in the Seattle region over the following days."

The US has failed to do any significant level of testing given its population, so it's understandable why many people are not confident in the official figures, especially when it becomes apparent infections have been running unchecked for weeks before testing started.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-de...

This already happened in Seattle [1]. Undetected COVID deaths are not "unexplained" because they look like flu deaths, so they're simply catalogued as being from the flu.

"In fact, officials would later discover through testing, the virus had already contributed to the deaths of two people, and it would go on to kill 20 more in the Seattle region over the following days." [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-de...

But that's most likely limited by testing resources. Many of the countries that haven't reported cases are developing nations that don't have the resources to do thousands of daily tests. Similarly, countries like the US have been lagging in their testing. Similarly, France has stopped doing tests except for people who are critically-ill.

So, it would stand to reason that you would see a decrease in the number of confirmed cases if there's an artificial limit in the number of cases reported.

Why not just ask the people directly for their contact information? Or vice versa ask your friend to ask them if it's okay to hand out your contact information?

I've had several friends ask if it's okay to give out my contact information to third parties who were interested in acquiring this information to continue conversations through more private channels.

But there was always an element of consent involved on my part.

They were also not meant for kids.[1]

1. https://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/history/brothers-grimm...

In my experience, it generally refers to mainframes or other specialized and powerful servers.

What he probably has access to is people who review his feed and replies and curate that for him. So he's not responding to tweets he's found himself; but rather to tweets that have been highlighted for him to respond to (if he so desires). Heck, his team might actually include possible response ideas.

The fallacy is thinking Elon uses Twitter like any other person uses Twitter. Sitting on his device, manually scrolling through it and replying sequentially. He's probably outsourced much of this to his media teams or other people he trusts to provide relevant material to engage with.

Most of the issues I've had with VS Code were actually due to extensions and not VS Code itself. Like for example, we started getting issues with CPU's getting pegged to 100% and it seems it was a couple of linters that were running causing that.