The reason people go for less effective filters is that it takes less force to push air through them, which lets you put more air through it with the same force/noise. The filters have a similar particle profile, they are all very good at stopping tiny particles and very good at stopping larger particles, and comparatively worse at particles between 0.1 and 0.3 microns. It's just that a HEPA grade filter stops 99.7% or more of those hardest particles, whereas a MERV 13 filter (the most common furnace-grade throughput-optimized filter grade) stops 85%.

People who haven't looked into it probably imagine that there exists some small size of particle which HEPA stops but non-HEPA filters let through. But that isn't so. All particles which gets stopped by one gets stopped by the other, the difference is just at what rate - and the smallest particles are actually easier to stop (something to do with Brownian motion)

Not anything with "ionization". Ionized air is a cute name for ozone. Ozone causes all the problems to your lungs that you clean air to avoid (well, except COVID infection I guess).

I wouldn't go for UV either since it either produces ozone or is quite bad to get exposed to depending on frequency range.

Get an air filter with high throughput. HEPA is standard, but many people argue that lower grade filters with higher throughput can be more noise efficient.

Hard to have sympathy with Elsevier, but this reeks of a failed COVID snake oil get-rich-quick schemer blaming someone else for not succeeding.

There were such people on TV too, if you watched the right (wrong) channels. Often music show hosts. The director wasn't prescient, he just was in touch with a trashy culture which hadn't quite hit mainstream yet.

That's interesting, because the main thing I've heard about him is that he did turn into a dickhole, having a reputation for being extremely cynical in his pursuit of clicks and profit and abusive to his staff.

Also fighting among themselves. Don't see this mentioned yet, but "Round Hill Music" is a copyright troll, a private equity roll-up buying up music catalogs to "monetize them" in ways like this. Independent music publisher my ass. No creative endeavor whatever is served by money accumulating to this entity.

That was an infamously bad ruling, and a good reminder of how the court system actually works when a judge thinks you're some long-haired furriner freak.

It's cargo cult logic. The rules only matter when the outcome doesn't. Everyone has a good impression of the court system until they come in contact with it.

Tunng, "The Wind-up Bird" sampled two lines from the film. They were apparently forced to take them out.
Copyright estates do far more damage than any book scanning project.

All these books have ISBN numbers, the article says so. So no, they're not out of copyright, they are all relatively "new" books (post 60s). The article tries to argue they could still have sentimental value, have unique margin notes etc. but odds are these are books no one would have shed a tear for.

People taking uncalibrated and unverified stuff and claiming life-changing benefits are why we are testing this in the first place.

> but can be largely controlled by the clinician/therapist/shamanic guide

From what I can tell this is a drug user myth, and one of the reasons these drugs are a drop in the bucket compared to other illegal drugs. A "trip sitter" is certainly a good idea, to avoid people hurting themselves as a result of drug-induced beliefs, but they won't save you from randomly having a bad trip, and once users have had a couple of those, they lose enthusiasm for the drug. LSD and friends are less affected by user expectation than other illegal drugs/alcohol.

I have also worked with implementing right to know and can attest that some companies take it very lightly and are one annoyed customer away from a very stressful and potentially expensive process.

I also helped push Spotify to implement listening history across devices with a DSAR, after first asking politely and getting the answer that it "wasn't a feature they were prioritizing".

All credit to our Austrian backgammon developer. More people should be like that.

A lot of armchair strategizing here seems to be based on the theory "he won't dare to do that back!"

Remember Deepmind was poaching elite talent left and right for a decade. It can't very well just plod along without these people. They're probably the least commodified of any of us.

I'm sure Google has been careful about that for just as long, doing their best to make them identify with management/owners rather than each other as workers. Not least with stock options.

I also suspect the union is a poor fit for these workers - "communication workers" are often call center employees IME, and all honor to them, but their concerns are almost certainly not the concerns of superstar googlers who just don't want to build the torment nexus.

If you think of taxes as "confiscation", then it seems to me it's taxes you object to.

You'll always have the choice to pay tax on the market valuation of your shares.

It's only if you think that valuation is inflated, you can choose to turn over the shares instead.

Hell, why not throw in a third option? Sell tax% of them on the open market yourself, and your tax is what you made from that.

Maybe come up with a fourth option too? Feel free. Maybe something to do with options? I'll be flexible, and allay your concerns about "unrealized gains" in whatever way you think is needed - except not taxing them. Wealth needs to be taxed, otherwise no social institution (including constitutions) can be trusted to endure.