There are so many counterexamples proving that your statement is just not true. I'll give you just one example, the Berkeley physics professor Richard Muller that took funding from the Koch foundation to attempt to "prove" that the satellite temperature data was "miscalibrated" and estimates of actual warming were overblown. Started the project in 2010. First published in 2011 showing that in fact the warming was real and using more advanced calibration techniques actually showed the warming was worse than we thought.
We truly do not know the root cause. There are plenty of folks with "degraded" endocrine, cardiovascular, and both systems. Most of them do not develop Alzheimer's.
Not really accurate. These chemicals are quite unreactive. Precursors from manufacturing waste can be very reactive, but most of the problematic contamination regards the forever chemicals themselves, not precursors. This paper is probably the best scientific review of what is going on in the human body. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03043...
Maybe sci-hub has a copy of the full paper. Not sure.
As briefly as possible, and therefore glossing over many many details, the toxic effects are mainly due to cell membrane perturbation, cell membrane transport disruption, and binding to hydrophobic protein cavities (thus disrupting the usual function of these cavities).
The budget wasn't appropriate regardless of tariffs. And OP's point is that 130B is a tiny number that no where near makes up for the loss in tax revenue from the very very stupid "OBBB".
You may be right, but the honesty has destroyed an insane amount of good will and privilege that the US previously enjoyed (deservedly or not). To throw that all away for literally no benefit is . . . not good.
If the OP had (incorrectly) rounded 130B to 200B, OP's point would have still been perfectly understandable and correct. Your odd quibble about rounding completely misses the point. Whooosh.
Most of my comments on hacker news are to point out something incorrect or mischaracterized. All I can come up with here is that this is a brilliant and heartfelt and entertaining documentary. Thanks to OP for posting.
I agree with your overall point. But I find it odd that you consider sales taxes to be the "fairest". Similarly, I find it odd that you put "progressive" taxes in some tension with "fair" taxes. Folks in the highest income range arguably benefit the most from govt services (e.g., infrastructure, defense, R&D, rule of law). They also have a much higher ability to pay well beyond basic survival needs. And, they can reduce sales tax burden by saving versus consuming, a choice that is not available to lower-income.
you literally said "cheap" and the comment said "cheap-er not cheap". I think the comment is correct and you are wrong. China is building the same design again and again and again. And it's still not cheap.
Doesn't really work that way. If you want to sue Abbot, then you have to reveal yourself. At which point, it will be clear that you were in fact using the product and did in fact agree to the ToS. If you never sue Abbot, then sure. But then it doesn't matter.
I have overseen over 20 phase III clinical trials. Many of those clinical trials have failed to show statistical efficacy. In every single one of those trials there are patients who see dramatic and undeniable benefits. In the oncology field, we continue to treat such patients even when the statistics say, no benefit. And, sometimes those patients just stay better. My point is, when the trial shows "no better than placebo", it doesn't mean the treatment doesn't work. It might be that. But more likely it means we don't know how to define the population of folks for whom the treatment does work. Maybe it's a particular genetic background, maybe it's age, gender, serum CPR or Tau level. Maybe it's something else. This stuff is complicated and interesting. And we are still figuring it out.
Very strange article. The author is very upset that an "intimacy tracker" might receive an 18+ rating on the app store. I mean yes, younger folks do it, but the vast majority of potential customers are 18+. Why is this an problem?
all the machinery used to obtain and maintain an economically viable fusion reaction. Having worked with particle accelerators and synchrotron rings, I'll tell you that stuff breaks down all the time.
Something similar happened to a friend of mine. In San Francisco. I just sort of assumed it was just bad luck. Bad things happen occasionally even in good systems. But maybe that assumption is wrong? Is this a thing? Are ambulances just unreliable?
Very unlikely that would happen. The way similar issues have been dealt with in the past is that settlement is negotiated to something "reasonable" (at least arguably so) and administrable. Probably the settlement amount would just go to a fund that the state would then distribute according to its priorities.