Honestly, it seems like one of the main [1] motivations for anyone participate on Wikipedia is to push some ideology or another. I know they theoretically have rules against it, but those are invariably enforced inconsistently and/or only against the most blatant cases.
IMHO, some prime Wikipedia skills are finding bureaucratic cover and being deliberately mute about your motives.
> This is why male saddles have a channel down the middle these days versus the old brooks style saddle
The article says those are actually worse:
> Bike saddles that feature a groove down the middle or holes in the center to alleviate pressure can actually make the problem worse by increasing pressure on either side of the groove.
> "They feel better," Schrader said of the grooved seats. "With the traditional saddle you're sitting on your internal penis. You can feel it. When it drops into the groove it feels better, but if you're increasing the pressure on either side, you're still compressing the artery and the nerves. The wider the seat, the farther back you sit, the better off you're going to be."
> ...too many hours on a bicycle saddle can compress the artery and vital nerves leading to the penis.
> The result? A risk of numbness, pain, and erectile dysfunction.
> Male cyclists can place a significant percentage of their weight on their perineum, an area between the scrotum and the anus where the nerves and arteries to the penis pass. This pressure -- and a narrow saddle seat -- can injure the arteries and nerves.
> "The earliest warning sign is numbness or tingling," says Irwin Goldstein, MD, director of San Diego Sexual Medicine.
> Even a young man may lose the ability to achieve an erection, says Goldstein, who pioneered an operation that restores blood flow and sexual potency in 65%-75% of cases.
> Elon Musk mentioned Nick Szabo on Lex Fridman's podcast as Szabo was also doing Bit Gold prior and is heavy into crypto and currencies. [3]
>> "Obviously I don't know who created bitcoin ... it seems as though Nick Szabo is probably more than anyone else responsible for the evolution of those ideas," said Musk, adding, "he claims not to be Nakamoto ... but he seems to be the one more responsible for the ideas behind it than anyone else."
Why do Elon Musk's speculations have any credibility here? It's not his field, and even in his field he has a track record of making confident public statements that turn out to be wildly wrong.
> Just six days after the launch of the site, three Harvard University seniors, Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, and Divya Narendra, accused Zuckerberg of intentionally misleading them into believing that he would help them build a social network called HarvardConnection.com, but instead using their idea to build a competing product.[21] The three complained to the Crimson, and the newspaper began an investigation. Zuckerberg knew about the investigation so he used TheFacebook.com to find members in the site who identified themselves as members of the Crimson. He examined a history of failed logins to see if any of the Crimson members had ever entered an incorrect password into TheFacebook.com. In the cases in which they had failed to log in, Zuckerberg tried to use them to access the Crimson members' Harvard email accounts, and he was successful in accessing two of them. In the end, three Crimson members filed a lawsuit against Zuckerberg which was later settled.[21][22]
> Here’s what triggered this: The ceremony includes bits of a recording (of tenor John McCormack singing “Funiculi, Funicula”) made in the year 1914.
The Corporate Takedown
> YouTube’s takedown algorithm claims that the following corporations all own the copyright to that audio recording that was MADE IN THE YEAR 1914: “SME, INgrooves (on behalf of Emerald); Wise Music Group, BMG Rights Management (US), LLC, UMPG Publishing, PEDL, Kobalt Music Publishing, Warner Chappell, Sony ATV Publishing, and 1 Music Rights Societies”
So what's going on here? Did some record company reissue the song later on CD, so YouTube is treating it like it was released at a later date than it was?
> All works first published or released before January 1, 1926, have lost their copyright protection, effective January 1, 2021.
Google probably should compile a list of public domain recordings to act as a blacklist for YouTube copyright claims. Maybe that should even be legal a requirement for such automatic enforcement systems. If they partner with some library or national archive, such a project could help with media preservation efforts.
> Unpopular question, how did a plane and jet fuel burn down a steel reinforced building?
That's the germ of a bunch of 20 year old paranoid conspiracy theories, basically the 2001 version of COVID denialism.
If you're asking a genuine question, there are decades-old engineering analyses and all kind of layman's translations of them that explain it. I'm sure they can be easily Googled.
> Additionally, the fact that members of the Saudi government aided and assisted the hijackers...
Details? My understanding is a huge fraction of the Saudi population have jobs that amount to government sinecures (while immigrants do most of the real work). Are we talking about high-level members with real leadership positions, or some minor member of the royal family working in some ministry doing nothing and going off on his own?
> If the federal government mandates their citizens pay taxes on crypto, it most definitely should come with federal help in catching criminals.
Not necessarily. The OP is pretty light on details on what this "hack" was, but if this was the case of someone playing "code is law" games with a flawed smart contract, then I think it'd be totally legitimate for the government to require taxes be paid but not swoop in with law enforcement when someone made a bad deal (i.e. had their flawed contract exploited).
When I was a kid in the early 90s, a nearby university had a Cray 1. We went on field trip to see it. IIRC, they got it because some oil company had gotten a better supercomputer and didn't need it anymore, so it was probably originally purchased sometime in the 80s or earlier.
> Supercomputers are becoming a useful and important tool in the finding and developing of oil and gas reserves. Applications of supercomputers in the petroleum industry involve two important aspects: enormous computational power and massive data management. Vector computers are being used in petroleum engineering to simulate the flow of oil and gas in a reservoir, the faster performance of the vector machines making many, heretofore, unmanageable calculations possible. In exploration for oil and gas, supercomputers are being used to store, classify, and interpret huge amounts of geophysical seismic data.
> What kind of work was he doing for them to try to sell to him? Same with the job interview?
My understanding is that the oil and gas industry is pretty heavy needs for scientific computation and data visualization. That's how they discover new places to drill.
> You don’t pursue a coalition with a tiny vocal minority at the expense of a greater group of people.
No? A coalition is A + B + C + ... ~= 50.1%, you might need that vocal minority to make the math work. And those factions won't agree on everything, so there will be intra-coalition tension, but they know they have to work together to get what they each want. However, there are limits, so if the coalition totally abandons C's issues (or even just severely de-prioritizes them), then C will leave.
> Wading into divisive, minority issues, seems foolish for a world leader unless the purpose is to sow division.
I'm not so sure. It kinda seems required sometimes if you're going to keep your coalition together. For instance, there are some people who are part of the Democratic Party base, who of all the issues out there, care the most about gender and bathrooms (I know some of them). Their stridency has inflected a good fraction of the rest of the party.
> I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Society doesn't get better because we elect the right politicians, it gets better because the people in it decide to be better (in themselves, towards each other, etc). Politicians are just a (grotesque, exaggerated, warped) reflection of the rest of us; they will never be our salvation.
I don't think that's quite right. IMHO, there's a feedback loop between those things and they're both important, especially on the negative side, but even on the positive side, too. So politicians won't be our salvation, but they will be part of it.
> I think the best way to save the planet is to move heavy industry into space. Move our power generation into space and beam it down.
Wasn't one of the disasters in Simcity 2000 having your power-beaming space laser miss your power station instead light your city on fire? It seems like such a thing would cause massive hazards.
> Move people into real orbital habitats.
> Make Earth proper a gigantic park / nature reserve.
Or force people to live deep underground. Then when they save up enough money to buy a ticket, they can be transported there much more economically.
IIRC, the recent doublings have been happening in Taiwan. That's why people make such a big deal about TMSC. America (i.e. Intel) actually has some catching up to do.
> It always amazes me how quick people are to needlessly take away freedoms and fuck others over as a knee-jerk reaction.
What freedoms? We're talking about tax advantaged investment accounts intended for a very specific public purpose, which are already restricted in many ways because of that.
If you don't like restrictions, we could also solve this problem by abolishing IRAs then. Does that sound better to you?
IMHO, some prime Wikipedia skills are finding bureaucratic cover and being deliberately mute about your motives.
[1] though not only, another big one is obsession