Dental problems aren’t about them looking good; teeth used to kill. Dental disease used to be the 5th leading cause of death. Your great-grandparents aren’t the best bar for dentistry in the past as modern dentistry began in the 18th century.
Dental problems aren’t about them looking good; teeth used to kill. Dental disease used to be the 5th leading cause of death. Your great-grandparents aren’t the best bar for dentistry in the past as modern dentistry began in the 18th century.
I have personally written code for quantum computers to save time due to algorithmic complexity; I was a college student at the time.
So if their usefulness is stuck in the unknowable future then I’m a time traveler.
Yeah, the reptilian archetype doesn’t have as much variation as one would like. People also said that the blue brute from Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country and Krall from Star Trek Beyond looked like Drazi/Narn, but I don’t see it.
I don’t understand your reply; I think you misunderstood my comment. OP is from Ireland (Europe), I’m saying that he is the one with Euro-identity bias, not you. From his locality within Europe, American shops appear ‘rundown’ in presentation, and there’s an implied suggestion that this is a uniquely American thing (within the global North-West). With that comes the bias that since he’s in Europe, the rest of Europe (or global North-West in general) would share this perspective.
I’ve had this same bias myself, having grown up in Italy I had assumed that was generally representative of Europe and there were many things I thought of as purely American that were actually common in parts of Europe.
Based on your and the other guy’s comment this sounds like European/Old-World identity bias (and a bit of availability bias); Assuming that other countries within one’s group-identity are very similar and [non-European country] is a lone standout when it comes to some aspect that one just learned they differ on. It’s so common to see these kinds of comments on posts of the form ‘why do American’s do this one weird thing different than everyone else’.
I mean… the title is pretty clear; it’s a ‘warning’ of a ‘risk’, not an announcement of the current situation. A risk is a possibility, and a warning of a risk must come before it is unfolding.
If by ‘String/Quantum’ you mean String Theory and quantum physics then you are wrong on the latter (and somewhat even the former). Quantum physics doesn’t replace classical physics nor are they necessarily in opposition, and quantum physics is as much a theory as classical physics; so bashing one for being ‘theory’ is just as true for the other. And quantum physics is certainly in common use as you simply cant do anything at the atomic level without it. For example, any modern computer would not be able to function if quantum physics wasn’t used to inform their design; in the same vein a modern computer would not function if classical physics was used to design them. It’s important to remember that the word ‘theory’ in this context doesn’t mean unproven, rather it describes a collection of confirmed, falsifiable, explanations of the natural world.
As for String Theory, it shouldn’t be thought of as equivalent in scale to quantum physics, it’s really just an optional framework within quantum physics that attempts to describe the fundamental nature of particles in a way that supports quantum gravity. Due to this its usage is confined to theoretical physics and is dependent on which aspects of a system is being investigated, but it’s still used in some situations as its one of the best supported tools available.
I guess my main point is that quantum physics isn’t fringe theory that shows up only in theoretical work, it’s very much a requirement for all fields and is thereby prevalent and very much in common use. I have a CS degree and many of my courses touched on quantum mechanics, from pnp/npn transistor design to quantum-annealing/gate proof cryptography, without getting too into the mechanics/math as we were not physicists.
I mean, you are correct, it was not two fish. But is 64 fish some sort of good sample size?
Given the results, it is significant.
Follow up question: does this type of thing accumulate in small fish and then concentrate in larger and larger fish?
No, tritium is treated by organisms just like normal H2O, bioaccumulation is no problem.
The Vatican is its own country, they don’t pay themselves taxes.
No, this is the media conflating the publics perception of physical security and cybersecurity to make a story. If you ask an average person how hard it is to steal money from a casino they’d say it’s next to impossible, but if instead you asked them how hard it was to hack their attached hotel’s booking system they’d say they had no idea.
Gunter’s chain is 20.1m, so half a Gunter is approximately a decameter; a rope would be unwieldy as it’d be one and two thirds rope per decameter.
No, the fact that businesses pay for it for something of that guarantee despite there being free peer-alternatives means that it is a better guarantee.
When you see businesses electing to pay for something despite free alternatives, there is likely a reason (or a number of them). I’ve seen free tools go from active maintaining to completely dead in a single update due to the work needed to get it back up and operating with new environment-side changes.
with respect to the liquid placed inside of it
It’s only this particular kind of plastic in its specific state with respect to the liquid placed inside of it, also the fact that the worry of micro/nano-plastics is relatively new.
I feel that the mention of reddit’s ‘r/all’ algorithm being better than Lemmy’s algorithm certainly shows a clear misunderstanding of these algorithms; r/all can be sorted in the exact same ways as Lemmy, the only difference is that reddit has more active users and thereby more content + people filtering it by voting. I also think people in this thread misunderstand ‘algorithm’ to mean something solely meant to find posts that they may personally like or at least the least are somehow quasi-objectively ‘good’. An algorithm for that can be made, but that is not what the algorithms currently in-use have ever been intended to do.
If someone wants a feed of posts that particularly targets their interests then they’ll have to tailor one themselves, just like on reddit.
While I agree with your main gist, I actually think this overall creates less misunderstanding than more; at least, and probably solely, with respect to what organic means. Because people read that headline and think ‘z0mg life discovered on mars’ and then one of a few things may happen which leads them to realize that organic != organism. Though some of those ‘few things’ may include temporarily spreading their incorrect interpretation to others, I believe even a slightly intelligent person will realize that they may have wrong information when this finding doesn’t end up as front page news and ‘breaking news’ segments around the world.
So at least in that respect, this kind of journalism constantly teaches and reminds people that organic doesn’t mean life. Though, ultimately, I still dislike it as much as the next guy.
Naturally, organic simply means carbon is present in the (non-metal) structure. Generally carbon-carbon, carbon-hydrogen, and a few other bond-types are considered organic. Many articles prey on people’s misunderstanding of this in order to craft a good headline, since “carbon-based material” doesn’t sound as exciting as “organic material”.
And when they say it “be created by processes not related to life as we know it” they should also probably mention that it can be created in the absence of any life at all; since if that weren’t true then it would in fact be direct evidence of life.
Read my comment above which corrects @Candelestine’s assertion that candle flame is a plasma.
Only very hot flames are a plasma and usually only within certain regions of the main body of the flame; most flames one encounters in their life will not be a plasma due to low or non-existent ionization. A candle flame is almost certainly not a plasma, rather it’s a combusting (oxidizing) gas which appears as a flame due to the emission of photons in the visible range from regions where the fuel is reacting with air. Furthermore, fire does not require mechanical or kinetic force to combine a fuel and an oxidizer, there is no need to ‘ram’ these particles together. Simple contact between a fuel and an oxidizer in states which would allow redox will cause burning and possibly visible flame (not all redox produces visible flame).
We are indeed more sexually fluid than most species and given it’s “most” and not “all”, this isn’t unprecedented. It’s also not a new phenomena, in Ancient Greek and early-mid Ancient Roman societies queerness was quite common. In fact homosexuality was so prevalent that that the Romans didn’t even have a word for heterosexual/homosexual; instead one was either dominant or submissive (e.g. giving or receiving) with the assumption being that most were bisexual and would take partners as they saw fit.