Thank you so much for this information. Your passion is contagious. I’m going to dive into all of these sources in the morning!

Have a wonderful day/evening/night!

So, as someone who has used the Internet since its very earliest days, what would you say about what the Internet is like today versus back then? Was it better? Worse? Any major online events that you can recall from that period?

I grew up at the very tail end of the old forums and certainly after the decline and death of old school chat rooms. Most of them died or went inactive while I was in high school/college. The version of the internet older adults used is almost alien to me.

Hell, today’s Internet is on its way to being alien too.

EVs are also a major issue for firefighters. Lithium ion battery fires following an accident are ridiculously hard to put out and present a significant safety hazard in confined spaces, like tunnels or narrow streets. It takes close to 6 times the water to control EV vehicle fires.

And while it’s a more minor issue, EVs are heavier than ICE vehicles in the same class, which causes more road wear and more tire wear (and more micro plastics to enter the environment).

And, I guess, finally, there’s no established break-even point for carbon emissions over ICE vehicles. The estimates provided in the literature vary wildly–from 13,000 miles to 94,000.

I love the technology, but I hope solid state batteries become a viable option for EVs.

As someone who peer reviewed papers, and got familiar with the process, most reviewers do not take the time to seriously examine papers. I would compare my comments to other reviewers for the same paper, and holy shit they barely read it. I would spot pretty blatant omissions–bad methodology, incomplete sections that make a paper impossible to reproduce, poor quality figures, need for major revisions. The other reviewers would offer minor suggestions and leave it at that. And the chief editor will push it out the door with minor revisions that don’t address any issues.

I have seen some truly blatant shit get published. Like figures that have made up data, or that we’re straight up copied from the authors’ previous publication and presented as new. The for-profit publishing industry doesn’t give a fuck. Those issues might get caught 10 years down the road, like in that case, but it’s usually a slap on the wrist for tenured faculty unless it gets lots of attention.

Prof in my department when I was a grad student blatantly copied work from another researcher, and the only sanctions he got were a moratorium on taking new grad students.

By virtue of having a disproportionately beneficial EU membership agreement, they actually caused friction with later EU members that received the standard agreements later on.

It’s hard to overstate how catastrophic the UK fucked up by leaving the EU. They joined on the bottom floor, had the leverage to negotiate a deal that gave them more benefits, let them keep their currency instead of promising to one day adopt the Euro, and had access to all the immigration controls they needed to deal with the ‘problem’ Tories perceived.

It’s incredible, really. Part of me still can’t believe they tossed all of that away. It’s got to be one of the biggest peacetime geopolitical fuckups ever.

This one is odd, I guess? So they had the autopsy stating the cause of death was homicide and a bunch of video evidence in September, and per the article, didn’t believe there was enough to charge these guys?

I wonder what changed.

Yeah, I’m basically where you are now with my mindset.

This CU helped me out during the pandemic, when I was on the struggle bus, but their rates are virtually unchanged since then. It’s pretty much just that and inertia that’s kept me with them so far.

Time to finally move on to somewhere that actually tries to keep up with the market.

Yeah, I am probably overthinking it. I’ll check around and open a trial account or 2 to see how good the places I’m thinking about moving to are.

And also, if I left, I definitely wouldn’t be eligible to rejoin. Moving and changing jobs has ended that.

It’s no more conditioned by society than polyamory. Animals exhibit both strategies. You seem to be conflating institutions like marriage with sexual selection.

Monogamy is a pair bonding strategy as old as humans. It developed at roughly the same time as polyamorous strategies. There’s a strong body of evidence that it became a very prominent strategy around 10-20k years ago, especially in areas with resource strains.

If you want to have multiple partners, by all means, do so, but don’t pretend it’s some construct. It’s a sexual selection strategy hardwired into many different species, including humans.

It just happens to coexist with polyamorous strategies in our species.

The term “shakedown” has been used to describe frivolous lawsuits seeking to strong-arm settlements from defendants for decades. Language is descriptive, not prescriptive.

They literally explained why it was a shakedown. I don’t know what else needs to be said.

The parents of the victims are suing organizations that have no chance of being held liable in the hopes that they get some form of payout. That’s what a shakedown is.

It’s tragic and I get their anger, but this isn’t going to succeed. Any legal team worth its retainer fee will successfully defend this.

Freelancer had to be pried from his control because he couldn’t meet even the least ambitious deadlines. Chris Roberts hasn’t managed a successful project from start to finish in over 20 years.

Quit embarrassing yourself and follow up on deleting your comments already. You’re a master class in how not to argue. If I still taught debate, I’d be using your comments to demonstrate fallacies.