Sanitizing efficacy is total organism count. Hand sanitizers are regulated by the FDA and tested in vivo using ASTM 1174 (Health Care Personnel Handwash / HCPHW test) and ASTM 2755. E1174 tests for Serratia marcescens or Escherichia coli. E2755 tests for S. marcescens or Staphylococcus aureus. ASTM E1174-21 includes a precision and accuracy statement. The FDA explains: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/09/06/2016-21...
generally an allusion to the sophomoric takes of enthusiastic ignorance found on places like Reddit (where The Oatmeal and Cards Against Humanity were popular)
This writeup looks at a successful product with a small number of features that was thereby distinguished from a field of unsuccessful products with a large number of features. Accounting for many products, considering both successes and failures (i.e. using a wide selection of data), it argues that the distinguishing factor of less features was related to the device’s popularity.
In the canonical example of survivor bias, the only bombers being examined (for their characteristics) in the original flawed analysis were the ones that made it back; the planes that were shot down (and their characteristics) were not being considered — an error.
I lived in a Hasidic neighborhood in Los Angeles and only have had good interactions with them. Always liked seeing their Hatzalah ambulance staged down the block.
It’s much more complicated and interesting than this. Books have been written about it (eg. Circumventing the Law: Rabbinic Perspectives on Legal Loopholes and Integrity by Elana Stein Hain). One of the ideas is that halachic loopholes are meant to be discovered. It’s also been compared metaphorically to the difference between tax evasion (impermissible) and tax avoidance (legal means to reduce our obligation created by the authority’s design) which is something we all do.
The expectations set for what turns out to be an article without solutions are also raised by the title the author chose. Show us these mythical perfect frames?
At least on Windows and Mac (since about 2017), Chrome doesn’t stay in sync with the printers installed on the OS but retains previous (ghost) profiles. So after printer updates (reinstalls) users will report printing working from Firefox, Edge, and Safari but not Chrome. (From the Chrome print dialog the user is selecting a printer with the same name as the current OS printer but the option displayed in Chrome is cached and since deleted.)