I did both in one day and it was very tiring (and I'm in my 20s). Herculaneum is small enough that anyone without mobility issues can do it, but Pompeii is quite large.
I also went to the volcano and the hike is about 3/4 of a mile and moderately steep. If your children are active they should be able to handle it, but the key is to wear shoes with good traction. Also they sell wine at the top, which is nice :)
It looks like the confidence interval is larger in earlier years because there are fewer data points.
Whats interesting to me is how big the spread is until the 1900s where not only is the blossom date trend increasing, but the individual blossom dates are grouping much closer together as well. I wonder if this is an error in measurement or if there is natural explanation for this variance reduction in the last 100 years.
This is a dangerous misconception. Bringing botulism spores to 100 Celsius will not kill them, the spores can survive indefinitely at these temperatures. This is literally the reason pressure canning was invented, to heat the liquid to a higher temperature such that botulism spores are destroyed.
This was brought up in a post below, but the first sentence is hard to decipher. I think "patiently allowed" here implies that they kindly answered his questions even though he was touching the third rail.
In other words he was afraid of being hated on for opening the dialogue, but the people on the Slack channel were fully willing to engage.
Actually in CA, many groceries are not subject to sales tax, just FYI. I'm not sure where the distinction is drawn, but it seems like the less processed the food the less likely it will be taxed.
The fact that a reviewer uses 2 and 4 ratings might not be too meanngful. One reviewer might use 2s and 4s the way another uses 1s and 5s.
There may be reviewers who do not generally fit the bimodal distribution, but if they are the minority, why design your whole rating system around them? Better to optimize your system for the way most of your users behave.
> "Being yourself", authenticity, and direct/brutal honesty are roughly orthogonal; you can (or not be) one without affecting the others.
While I agree with the general sentiment of your post, I find quote does not actually work out in practice.
I have been in many situations (ie around family, coworkers, etc) where the group has a strong opinion about something and I feel the opposite. I would usually not chime in and let the conversation move on, but when people ask your opinion, there is a decision. As far as I can see, the options are basically:
1) Lie: not authentic or direct honesty
2) Avoid/Deflect: maintain authenticity, not direct honesty
3) Fein disinterest: lacking authenticity, not direct honesty
4) Express your dissent: authentic, direct honesty
The only options for maintaining authenticity are to be directly honest, or to not answer, and there is a limit to the extent you can avoid answering direct questions and still maintain freedom and conserve your energy and focus.
So while I agree that you don't have to be brutally honest to be authentic, I would say they are far from orthogonal. Sometimes choices have to be made, especially around people who have a tendency to pry or ask your opinion a lot.
I also went to the volcano and the hike is about 3/4 of a mile and moderately steep. If your children are active they should be able to handle it, but the key is to wear shoes with good traction. Also they sell wine at the top, which is nice :)