I'm not sure I would go that far. Some considered Slotin's methods dangerous: 'Enrico Fermi himself had warned Slotin that he would be “dead within a year” if he continued'.
It's easy to understand. Open plan offices have the advantage of being cheaper, and the disadvantage of harming productivity. The cost savings are immediately apparent and easily attributed. Productivity hits (or gains) come later, are harder to assign a utility to, and are harder to attribute.
I dunno, if you have been gestating a foal, you might be a little undernourished at the end of the process, so a placenta's worth of nutrients might then be "vital."
"Third, a city-level analysis such as ours does not suffer from a common problem with individual-level studies, namely that individuals exposed to lead typically come from poor neighborhoods with both low-quality housing and high crime rates. Common confounders of the lead-crime relationship in individual-level studies pose less of a problem in our city-level study, where in most cases the entire city population was exposed to lead through water."
I think that's a neat idea, but I personally would be nervous about smearing grease all over my tablet, or spilling fluids on it, or dropping it -- something that happens to almost every other tool at one point or another.
As a reference away from the garage, it would be cool, but I would still want something I would feel safe having by my side as I work on the car.
You might want to pick up the Chilton's or Haynes manual for your vehicle and start from there. Most of these manuals will have a section describing how you perform basic maintenance on the vehicle.
That's the lovely thing about this piece. Often times when I read these thinkpieces, I know a bit about the author and his or her biases, and have to exercise some discipline to not let that color my opinion of the article too much.
I've never heard of Sonny Bunch, so in this case it is pretty easy.
It takes only a small amount of induction to conclude that given the number of death row exonerations pre-execution, there almost certainly have been innocent persons executed.
If you hold out for conclusive proof, you will probably not find it, as it's a bit of a fool's errand to attempt to exonerate a dead man when you could devote that effort to exonerating one who the state has not yet committed manslaughter upon.
However, the primary evidence we have that Glossip ordered the killing is the testimony of the guy who actually did the deed, and who avoided a death sentence in exchange for that testimony. It's a little fishy.
That grant would be bigger than anything any subsequent engineer would earn, and it's beyond dubious to think the contribution of this guy -- who's patting himself on the back for figuring out a CRM schema -- is worth more than the guy who stays for 4 years and actually helps brings the product to maturity and exit.
If I've learned anything since I got out of graduate school, it's this: what you're "worth," what you "deserve," are meaningless concepts. You get what you negotiate, no more and no less.
Someone who thinks that 40 beeps for the founding team is too much probably shouldn't invest in this startup. For me, if I thought that the company would be worth $100M in five years, the $1.6M the SW team would be getting would be the least of my concerns, well behind 'how do I get in on this?'
The old, grim joke was "a tactical nuke is one that explodes in Germany."
But yeah, small and designed to be delivered against enemy troop concentrations, as opposed to the larger strategic weapons that are designed to be used against enemy population centers and strategic weapons.
The same "not sticking our noses into other people's relationships" was the root of the Family Values crowd in the 80's saying that domestic violence is a family issue, incest is a family issue, etc. Where do you draw the line at sticking your nose into other people's relationships?
How about we put the line somewhere between physical force and broken promises? Just an idea.