Civilization VI on the iPad is a great port. I play PC and Xbox too. But if I had to choose just one thing, having a full quality PC game on an iPad mini to play anywhere with many, many hours of battery life is just perfect.
As a parent that has experience with Apple's parental controls, they are nevertheless better than what the competition gives you. Guided access is great for really little ones. And then Screen Time gives you the controls you actually want, they extend across devices, and you can manage them either from the device itself or from either parent device. As they get older you can back off control in a gradual and sensible fashion. All the while family purchases and Apple subscriptions are shared across family members.
It's weird, but the Kindle Fire Kids, which is explicitly designed for child use, isn't nearly as good as using an iPad mini.
Disclaimer: I don't own a Tesla.
The NACS (what Tesla called it after opening it up) is objectively the better plug. I hope it wins out. It's not like Europe and North America are using the same plug anyway (CCS 1 vs 2), while China and Japan have two yet different plugs. So we might as well choose the better plug while there's still a chance.
Thank you! Too much emotion in this debate, not enough science.
"Trapped" implies that valuable assets still exist. It's gone. Like putting your money with Madoff. Poof.
But I'm sure the hedge fund executives enriched themselves with fantastic, tax-preferred compensation while the scam was running. So what do they care. Say you're sorry and rip off the next group of investors. None of them are going to prison.
Wait, I'm confused. You're talking about crypto, or fiat currency?
Crypto is fiat. It has no commodity value.
In crypto's speedrun of banking history, this is 17th century goldsmith banking. You take custody of a reserve asset (gold, US dollars) and issue tradable notes in exchange (gold certs, stablecoins). This makes it easier for your customers to transfer custody of the underlying asset by trading the cert/stablecoin instead.
After a while a while you decide to make extra money by lending out the underlying reserve asset, trusting that not everyone will come to you to redeem at once. A little while after that, you don't even bother to loan out the reserve asset, but instead you just start creating new certs/stablecoins out thin air and lend those out. Pocket as much profit as you can, before sooner or later a run destroys your bank revealing that you can't cover your tradable asset.
These aren't exchanges, they are banks. They have been compared to the wild west, but that's totally unfair. Wildcat banks were far better run and stable than crypto. Yet we did away with those because they kept hurting consumers. Nowadays we only let so-called sophisticated investors take risks like that with hedge funds. And nobody should be under any illusion that those provide stability or the ability to withdraw funds in a crisis.
Banks are not subject to runs in the way that you think. Banks have *many* financing options available. Taking deposits is the *cheapest* finance mechanism, but it's far from the only one. Banks can borrow from each other. Banks can access repo markets. Banks can show up at the Federal Reserve discount window. As long as a bank is *solvent*, it can find ways to deal with *liquidity*. Now some of them are expensive enough that the bank *might* become insolvent. But liquidity and solvency are different concepts. If a bank *does* experience a severe run, the FDIC will "wind down" the bank in some way or other and depositors will be made whole. Tether is nothing like banking.
Tether is nothing like regulated banking. It does strike me as akin to wildcat banking.
For those unfamiliar with Chegg, it's one of the, if not the, largest online cheating platform. There is some free access to cheating materials, there is a subscription for better access, and you can pay more for personalized cheating support.
The usual codewords used are "homework help" for just the cheating materials and "tutoring" to have someone do the work for you.
One hundred percent agree. Only redeeming quality is that they will take stuff down pretty quickly. I had a student post my entire final MATLAB project up (8 different coding questions, all authored by me so they can't find similar solutions on the web). Wrote a little take down request (my intellectual property, blah blah) had the provost sign it, and they took down the content within hours. Also provided me the email address of each of the users who posted it. It ended up three different contacts. One of my student's emails... their parent's email... their brother's email. Guess the family that cheats together stays together.
Were there meaningful consequences for the student? I assume not but would love to be wrong.
For those unfamiliar with Chegg, it's one of the, if not the, largest online cheating platform. There is some free access to cheating materials, there is a subscription for better access, and you can pay more for personalized cheating support.
The usual codewords used are "homework help" for just the cheating materials and "tutoring" to have someone do the work for you.
- Zero-emission vans, SUVs, and trucks with MSRPs up to $80,000 qualify
- Electric sedans priced up to $55,000 MSRP qualify
So even more regulatory pressure to make every family car with a hatch an SUV rather than a station wagon.
These days OSX is closer to classic unix than Linux is currently.
Not surprising, considering macOS is a certified UNIX system.
https://www.epa.gov/ingredient...
No indication that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor. Glyphosate has undergone Tier I screening under EPAâ(TM)s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Based on all available information, EPA concluded, using a weight-of-evidence approach, that the existing data do not indicate that glyphosate has the potential to interact with the estrogen, androgen or thyroid signaling pathways. The screening program did not indicate the need for additional testing for glyphosate.
Emphasis in the original.
If you want to go with the EPA's line on this, that's your prerogative. Based on the mounting scientific literature, a survey of which I shared with you, indicating the potential for endocrine disruption, I expect the EPA will have to change their tune eventually and that the European regulators are ahead of us on this one. At a minimum, additional testing will have to be done.
It goes without saying that I hope I'm wrong on this one.
It doesn't target only weeds. It kills a lot of plants. Farmers who use it generally also use crops that were bred or engineered to be glyphosate tolerant. But it is very selective to a plant enzyme, and there's no known mechanism for it to cause health problems in mammals. (The evidence for carcinogenicity is mixed at best, and national health authorities mostly do not share the WHO assessment cited in TFS.)
On the other hand, a lot of weeds have developed glyphosate tolerance now too.
Yes, there is. Endocrine disruption. There is some debate about whether it is an endocrine disruptor, but the evidence is mounting that it's a bingo.
Now lower the price.
"I don't believe in sweeping social change being manifested by one person, unless he has an atomic weapon." -- Howard Chaykin
