But it's gonna take money, a whole lotta spendin' money...

You keep asking for sources about whether or not compromises were made in testing accuracy to get it in the form of nail polish. I assumed you were just being lazy, because how could there not be a more in-depth article out there on something that's getting so much attention. Well, after a bit of searching, it appears you probably weren't being lazy... I couldn't find anything out there in the form of details. Maybe the detection rate isn't so great... or (god forbid) they're having difficulty with false positives or false negatives.

The phrase "programming language" is so vague that it's wide open for interpretation. That's why I'm not going to say you're wrong, which was my first inclination, but simply disagree with you.

My definition of a programming language is that which is compilable into machine-readable form.

Now you're going to say, "HTML can be compiled into machine-readable form, it's displayed on your screen, isn't it?!". Yes, the content that originated from HTML (and others) is displayed on your screen, but that's because the browser is interpreting the HTML and then displaying it. Like someone else already responded to you and said, HTML is data, or more specifically structured content.

An analogy that may help distinguish HTML (and CSS and the like) from what I consider programming languages would be to take printing a certificate using a word processor. The words and images you insert into the word processor isn't a "programming language". It's a "template" which is used by the printer in order to display the content (on paper), just like browsers that use the HTML to display the content (on the screen).
HTML tags for forms, different types of media, etc. kind of blur the lines a little bit because they instruct the browser to perform certain actions, but that doesn't invalidate the interpretation of HTML as a display template, or data.

I know. That's why, just about every year, I have to either change to a similar plan with less benefits or bump up my deductible to keep it from going up much. The only time I didn't have to do that was last year, when I did a "risk re-evaluation", which turned out in my favor.

No, but my health insurance (individual, not through my small-business employer) goes up about 30% per annum... but I digress...

Well, if you do it right (run for office), you aren't footing the bill, your supporters/constituents are.

He did use the original inputs (control pad and buttons, power slider).

I think it's the infection rate that is all the hubbub, to put it lightly. 67 new cases and 19 deaths in the span of 3 days (July 15-17)?

Then, posted not long ago, an update: 45 new cases and 28 deaths from July 18-20.

Yeah, the first thing I thought of was: how many people who graduate with any 4-year degree stay in their field of study? Without having anything to compare this to, how do we know that the numbers for STEM graduates are abnormal?
I would guess that those figures for the STEM graduates aren't too different from any other field.

Also, it would have been more meaningful if they had limited the time after graduation. For example, if 50% of STEM graduates were working in an unrelated field 10 years after graduation, I'd say that says a lot more than just "currently". Seems to me a significant number of people "retire" from their main field of study and then take on another, completely unrelated, but more satisfying job in their golden years (i.e. retiring from a management position to work at a golf course).

The Electrotherapy Museum referenced at the end of the summary is no longer open to visitors as of June of this year.

I may have not completed my thought and main point, although it may be obvious enough... the shots in the video being further out will end up having much more curve on them by the time they reach the goal. The same shot closer to the goal won't have as much noticeable curve, of course.

Good question, but I'd argue it's more about shot selection than anything. Most of those goals were well beyond the 18 (the penalty box). If you're comparing to recent games (yeah, I'm in the US, I still call them games, shoot me), like in the World Cup, you see very few shots outside the 18. An extreme example would be the Netherlands-Argentina game where they both played very defensive games. Even in games like Germany-Brazil, it seemed Germany was more about finesse and getting the ball deep inside the box to increase chances of the shot going in the back of the net. Even on free kicks near the 18, not many are even an attempt on goal, but rather crosses.

I used to play, and IMHO shot shaping is more about technique (and shot selection) than the design of the ball. You'll notice in your video a lot of them were hit with the outside of the foot, right or left, and that's the easiest way to get it to curve to the outside. You don't see many players these days even attempting those.

That might have been where they went, but it's not where they're going...

Yeah, true. The show's OK so far. Has more potential to interest me than most of the other stuff on TV these days.

So, you're watching Halt and Catch Fire too? ;-)