"1) Canada has already lost its status. Its hard to see how that is Trump's fault."

It is the fault of people who cause other people to hesitate or not vaccinate. We call them anti-vaxxers.

"2) Trump has only been in office for less than a year. Its unlikely the measles outbreak is a result of any of his policies."

Trump appointed an anti-vaxxer to head the CDC. This is his policy. His actions drive this as much as RFK and other anti-vaxxers. No one seems to disagree that the folks who vote for silly policies view his silly policies as legit, and legit policies as silly. That means they are the same problem -- ignorance masquerading as a relevant choice due to people's fear, uncertainty, and doubt. The same things any flim-flam con-artist would brag about.

"3) The outbreak is all along the southwest border with large populations of people who lack access to regular health care."

Yes, it is truly sad to see how terrible healthcare is in the United States. Why do you view that as a reason to not try anything new, and give up what little is being done? We seem to agree that what exists is not satisfactory.

"Blaming anti-vaxxers is attributing way too much power to a fringe group."

Wrong. That's like saying the person who drove the car off the cliff isn't responsible, because the other people in the car could/should have wrestled the wheel away from the driver. The driver is responsible. It is ridiculous to claim otherwise (you sound brainwashed).

"Perhaps we should look at years of neglect of public health in those states instead. With millions of people lacking access to basic health care what did you expect?"

Yeah, normal people have decried the terrible state of public US health policy. The only improvement in the last 2 decades was Obama Care. What's with the Republicans taking that away? How far into the dark ages do they want us to go?

""Trump did it" has become the standard excuse for the widespread failure of our political class. You can just point the finger at Trump and pretend the problems will be solved when he goes away. So his rival politicians will spend the next three years talking about Trump instead of addressing how to make our lives better."

Like you are doing? This "point" seems weirdly self-antithetical. Trump is one part; there's also Justice/SCOTUS, Senate, Congress. All aspects of government are in government, otherwise it's not government. Seems tautological.

"Its not that there isn't a lot to criticize about Trump. Its that most of the criticism is directed at minor sideshows like this one. And I say that as a former community health worker who spent a couple years knocking on parent's doors to increase the level of MMR vaccinations in local schools. I may have run into one parent who opposed vaccination. The rest just lacked the personal resources to get their kids immunized. They had a hard time making sure their kids had breakfast and got to school."

You know, programs that provide food to those in need + vaccine resources were cut by Trump and his cabinet of doom? This "point" also illustrates that this problem is big and has many factors at play, like problems that humans have traditionally banded together to face. That's why most developed countries (just the USA abstaining) use socialized healthcare policies.

Frankly, your confused post just shows why the problem seems intractable to the occupants of the country most victimized by their own medical policies -- the current USA medical policy is rake-stepping! You have people who make more money than god from medical care profits which are in the bleeding-from-your-eyes-numbers of over ,000 markup, because no-one shops around for things like bullet extractions. It's not a service that does well in unregulated capitalism (unless you own the company selling heroin, in which case you're billionaires and don't care).

Trump is also a promoter of that. It's valid to mention the toxic effect his cabinet and policies have had during *BOTH* of his terms, because that is literally what's happening now. These are the issues we agree on, and these are things driving those issues. The learned helplessness and unwillingness to challenge ignorance you seem to suggest isn't helpful, in my opinion.

Not a big fan of this, but I'm pretty certain they need that money to actually replace all the working parts of the reactor. Only the concrete shell will be reused. They could probably use the same amount of money to fix reactor 2 the same way, they are just not touching it because of history.

There was a paper about rust use in open source projects, looking at vulnerabilities introduced by developers with different contribution histories. They suggest that you need to spend working several years in a C++ codebase to get down to the same defect rate as a new contributor in a rust project.

https://cypherpunks.ca/~iang/p...

If that is true, then there is probably little reason to worry.

The interesting thing is more productivity while reducing the number of bugs. Normally reducing bugs requires stricter processes, which typically reduces productivity.

>But in a good model, esp. a thinking model, one
>would expect it to think over which sorts of
>numbers are statistically over-chosen (birthdates,
>etc) and avoid them in giving its answers.

and even then, it doesn't affect the chance of *winning*, but rather the chance of being the *sole* winner, as opposed to having to share the price.

[there *is* another possibility, though, albeit unlikely: it could come across a flaw in the RNG that lets it avoid less likely combinations, or choose a more likely one. Again, though, this requires an RNG flaw.]

just like when it hit three digits?

>Mexico has a half peso coin, worth about 2 cents.

and a peso was like a dollar.

I recall my aunt feeling guilty about what she was paying down there when it dropped to about eight to a dollar.

And then they lopped three zeroes off to get the new peso.

I *think* this is half of those one-thousands of the prior peso . . .

After extreme inflation, small matters of rounding aren't even on the radar for what's important.

[Let alone the 27 or so zeroes lopped off in Germany {where, near the end, workers were reportedly paid twice a day, with their wives bringing wheelbarrows to collect, and rushing to spend it before it fell further! (which may be an urban legend; I've never been able to confirm it, but it's not inconsistent with the daily inflation)}. Or Yugoslavia, which lopped off 30 digits . . . ]

[cloudtrack, err, flare, verification? *REALLY*]

And of further interest, I've never seen one in the US that was a round number of cents--they all end in 9/10 of a cent. (although in years past, 4/10 was also common)

Hahaha, what?

You say the pilot in control should have intentionally sheered off the wings (FULL OF JET FUEL) off during a dual-engine failure? You obviously have no idea about planes.

There is nothing that could have been done. They were past V1. There was no arrester pit at the end of the runway (which wouldn't have done much). We're talking about a vehicle loaded with 10,000s of lbs of fuel. Sheering the wings off would have spread chaos and destruction.

There is nothing that could have been done.

I was trying to point out how ridiculous the GP's idea is. I was not making a serious suggestion.

Why not give everybody a boat and tell them to spend all their days fishing?

China calling Elon. Come in, Elon! :)

bah.

Let me know when they start making *autographic* 120 film again. I have the camera, and am dying to shoot a roll!

The last rolls were apparently made in 1932. The cameras had a flap that could flip up and allow writing directly onto the film with a stylus. When you see handwriting on an old picture print, it was likely shot on autographic.

[and, yes, in fact my autographic camera *does* have bellows!]

I think your idea of how fast subduction happens is a little off by some orders of magnitude.

However encasing it in something that won't leak (like glass) and dumping it in a very deep and dead part of the ocean is plausible and may be the best idea we have. There is no need to aim for the subduction fault, that makes no difference.

Still don't understand. According to your own post you would use electric for "most" of your driving.

Also a Hybrid is much more efficient with gas than a plain ICE. It already has the electric motor and some batteries, the PHEV is not more complicated.