Did Syd take a measured dose of a specific, professionally refined and purified chemical? Or are the two situations not comparable?

It's not 'the' question. It's barely 'a' question. It's just been a popular one that has been seeded over every social media site for the last few years by multiple anonymous accounts - wonder who has been paying for that?

It's insulting to think that people who work day-to-day with climate data haven't thought of and accounted for that effect. We've got global, daily, satellite-based monitoring of both land and ocean surface temperatures. We can detect the local environment component of temperature change at specific sites with long time series.

That 'careful look' you wanted has been done - some people are just really 'invested' in trying to get people to discount the result. The world, as a whole is warming. The level of warming is in keeping with what we expect from the physics of atmospheric CO2. Those are facts. What, if anything, to do about those facts is still up for discussion.

Honestly, you bellowing at the family that they need to run because you've only budgeted 5 minutes in your schedule for this rest stop sounds like much less of a vacation than a chilled out trip in an EV.

If work need me to go somewhere for a meeting they pay for a hire car to avoid insurance issues, or send me via public transport - why would you put miles on your own vehicle?

Here, what I've saved on buying petrol has paid for the car, so it's very much the case of people needing to do their own due diligence on how the numbers work out for them. As for range, the car has a better range than my bladder. The discussion surrounding EVs is indeed full of lies, but they mostly are not being told by the people who are saying that an EV worked out well for them.

Or you can take the intention of the project and focus on the word 'Left'. It shouldn't be about ensuring nobody is behind (impossible anyway) but about ensuring that nobody is LEFT behind purely because of their starting point. It's about not wasting talented students who just need a bit more extra attention to them for whatever reason. Not wasting resources is prudent conservatism.

1 year Software Engineering MSc for me, to turn the coding skills I'd learned as a physicist into something more formal. Project management and design skills, and then a broad spectrum of taster courses in languages, technologies, and topics - just enough to get you started if you went in that direction.

The removal of those tests helps those who have not been tutored to pass those specific tests ANS who also have the natural aptitude that will allow them to excel when they enter higher education. I've met students like that. The overall number may be small, but the number of students who benefit from the removal of that hurdle is non-zero. It's up to you to decide whether to treat them as acceptable losses.

What we actually need is a better method of selectively assessing who is ready for higher education. That's not a simple problem to solve.

Successfully dismantled government waste something something overreach something woke ideology something Biden

What makes you think there is any interest in balancing the budget? The aim is to continue to buy a stream of 'victories' that can be used to convince a power base to keep voting. Doesn't matter about the budget - you can blame that on whoever 'them' is today.

No idea why you are currently -1. Algorithmic targeting of people to push views that will swing them on wedge issues is absolutely what is causing the increase in polarisation and encouraging people to dismiss any fact that differs from their carefully curated stream of opinion reinforcement as 'fake news'.

The vast majority of adults do not fully understand the vast majority of the risks that they are exposed to every day.

However, on this specific topic you seem to agree that you'd need to be an adult to make an informed choice to use the technology and that information should be available warning you of the risks so that you can make an informed choice.

If all of the entrenched, senior IT folks like you unionised and went on strike until new hires were paid what you consider to be 'American wages', it would happen. Are you going to do that?

Well, not impossible. Some of us are still delivering multi-million contracts using GCC and a text editor, but yes it's increasingly rare to do something that's built entirely from your own source.

Due to the law of diminishing returns, wouldn't focussing on the lower quartile do more to improve average gains than focussing on the top quartile? Shouldn't also to 'top' be self-motivated and talented enough to improve their own performance?

Setup costs don't repeat, so the cost of follow-on years will differ. A large incoming lump sum also allows you to pay down debt, releasing money that would have gone on yearly interest payments, which provides more money in future years than the current budget.

So there are plenty of ways to fully-fund a new, on-going cost with a lump-sum windfall.