My understanding is that modern household water wells generally use reverse osmosis systems. Water quality from drinking wells varies widely depending on the location and quality of the well. But (1) they aren't 100% effective, nor can they be against unanticipated chemicals that weren't being pumped into the ground en masse at the time the well was designed, and (2) I shouldn't have to pay to upgrade my drinking water well filter to handle chemicals used in fracking. Fracking companies should be not contaminating my drinking water.
Who markets the water for the drinking well at a person's home?
You're thinking of the local water company with it's water filtering plants and pipes that lead directly to your home. That is not where fracking is happening. Fracking is done out where there isn't public water and sewer. People have drinking wells for their homes.
This article is saying that fracking chemicals are getting into the same water that is feeding the wells to people's homes. It is the fracking companies' responsibilities to keep their chemicals out of our drinking water wells.
Like the parent post said, "Musk is changing the world":
Solar City lets you buy your solar panels for zero down and "lets you pay off your loan with monthly payments based on the electricity your system produces." So it ends up that the electric bill plus the Solar City bill add up to less than the old electric bill. You don't need a pile of money lying around to buy a modern home solar system. Non-wealthy people who do not care about the environment are signing up with Solar City simply because they'll pay less for utilities.
So, yeah, Musk is changing the world--he's causing people who don't care about the environment to put solar panels on their house that a few years ago would have made zero financial sense. In case you haven't noticed, he also made an all electric vehicle drooled over by people who don't care about saving gas.
I think this paper is saying it is worse than this. Only about 5 percent of studies with 5% chance of results by random chance should be wrong. But this is saying that 60% weren't replicated. It's almost as if the researchers feel pressured to publish papers and they have a hard time publishing papers without results.
These frakking polls are bovine scat.
Ummm, like, I think you've missed the point. The researchers did not say that 100% of people who aren't "Millennial" hate Snowden. They showed that, looking at one metric--age--the percentage of people who appreciate Snowden has a clear trend. And they are saying that this particular trend matters because Millennials will soon be running the country.
If the researchers looked at the demographic of "people who comment on
Sorry I have no mod points, but this is funny.
I always find it amazing that these huge companies with enormous public domains don't have a person who's job description includes managing all of their certs and making sure they don't expire.
I bet they do. That's probably the problem--some human screwed up. I am surprised thee huge TECHNOLOGY companies with enormous public domains don't have an automated system to keep an eye on these things and auto-renew or alert a human or something. Heck; maybe they do and the alert failed, or alert to human went to spam, etc.
This looks to me just like Square Cash.
The problem is that "your chosen extensions" can cause worse bloat than an unused feature in a browser. I'd rather have as much functionality as I can from the developer of the browser itself. Extensions are helpful (particularly for obscure features that no browser developer would bother writing because the user base would be too small) but all to often they break more than they fix.
Basically, the Vivaldi browser is designed to appeal to people who miss Opera 12.x. When Opera moved to Chromium in version 15, it did basically what you are talking about--stripped out nearly every feature aside from browsing itself and it opened up to Chrome extensions. But, many of us found that, in order to add extensions to Opera 15 and later, that met the features we used from 12.x, the browser was a hulking mess--and the extensions for the most part don't work as well as the built in functionality from 12.x. And the whole thing was now slower and riddled with memory leaks due to the extensions.
So, basically, I'm not going to suggest that you must switch to Vivaldi, but personally, I am keeping my eye on the project. I think there is a good user base to be had out there for it.
But don't the fitness trackers all pair with smartphones to actually convey the data they collect? It seems that this research is saying that any fitness tracker that relies on pairing with a phone is redundant (unless the tracker does something grand that the phone does not).
Disclaimer: I have a smartphone, so I don't feel like I need a fitness tracker (and still wouldn't feel like I was in need of a fitness tracker if I didn't have a smartphone--I don't need something on my wrist to tell me that I sit in front of a computer in my mom's basement all day).
Holy crap! I'm having a hard time imagining that getting funded.
I've always wondered the purpose of the wrestling in Festivus. It all comes together now.
Personally, I think voting is a great way to determine truth. When that doesn't work, generally a wrestling match does.
I agree with this, but I'm not particularly concerned. I do not think that the general public would be viewing the videos like a live feed or much at all. I think we already have precedent for how this would work--dash cams in police cars. That system seems to work fine and I think it would be the same here.