I got an email from a colleague on how the administration is trying to get around the judges' actions. It included a link to the American Association for the Advancement of Science on how to oppose this if you are so inclined. Public comments need to be submitted by July 13.

There is also a link to send to non-scientific friends and relatives on why this is bad to try to get them to take action.

Scientific Discussion: https://www.aaas.org/resources...

Layperson focused: https://www.cbpp.org/research/...

Where to make a public comment: https://www.federalregister.go...

"Almost 90 years after the horrible Hindenburg disaster, many companies and militaries are considering lighter than air travel. I will show my bias by omitting the fact that none of these use hydrogen like the Hindenburg and thus cannot have a similar fate in the hope that my audience is stupid and no one will notice I'm comparing apples and cantaloupes."

Keep it private, will ya???

Great read about the dangers that people are talking about even if the tech doesn't fail.

Anyone else get one of Grace Hopper's nanoseconds?

The company which survived solely because they ripped off Xerox PARC has no right to ever complain about someone stealing their tech.

The real question in this announcement is "Why just the Northeast, why not everywhere?"

The answer is that Comcast is not the only "real"* option in most of the Northeast while they are in the rest of the country. Thus, they know that they can't get away with it without losing customers to competitors in the Northeast while the rest of the country has no other options.

Having a monopoly and running your lobbying and campaign contribution operations to prevent any potential trustbusters from reaching office is a very effective business model.

* "Real" being defined as an option that is comparable in price and performance without requiring installation that most consumers would find too difficult.

" the common Epstein conspiracy is that he didn't commit suicide, he was murdered"

The phrase "Epstein didn't kill himself" can mean two things. You cover the first, but there is also the extreme Epstein conspiracy, which is that he wasn't killed at all and is at large on some tropical island and they used some homeless guy's body as his for the autopsy.

"So...you normally send your 6 month old off to day care?"

If their spouse normally watches the child while the poster is at the office, the child's crying doesn't impact their work, while if the baby's in the next room, it will.

I'm curious how that would work. I've rarely come across something on Google Maps or Waze that isn't correct, so I don't know if there will be enough data to safely classify someone as reliable. It's not like Wikipedia where a person can edit enough articles to be deemed reliable.

Now, if they're connecting it to your social media scores (This person has excellent karma on /. so they are probably reliable, it might be possible, but that's a somewhat scary thought of moving to a social score based upon your internet (and perhaps other) activities.

Otherwise the list of rioters is merely a list of last minute pardons.

This is why people who produce such subtle, fair-minded, agenda-less content usually type in all caps with misspellings so that their meaning is not lost. Had this article been:

"UBER BAD - IT WASTED HUNDERD MILION ON SKAM ADDS THAT SHUD GO TO POOR POENS IT XPLOITS!!! AND THO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, BREITBART BAD TWO!!!!"

its thesis wouldn't have gone over your head.

In some ways it's better than "Breaking Bad." The entire cast is so good, but Odenkirk and Seahorn are just awesome - her not winning the Emmy shows how little that award matters. Even though you know where it's going, it is still incredibly compelling watching Jimmy's transformation into Saul.

You know that Kim isn't in Saul's life by the beginning of "Breaking Bad," but you're hoping that she gets her crap together and dumps him rather than paying the price for his sins. However, with this show, that's not too likely.

I loved it, but I hope that they don't continue it, although I'm sure they will. Sometimes a story is so good that adding more to it results in the addition not being as good as the original and even somehow lowers the quality of the original.

In my mind, this season didn't have too many more episodes in it. There are only so many times that the cycle of "does well - triggering event causes descent into drugs/alcohol - problems ensue - friend pulls her out - does even better" can work without becoming trite. I thought they did that perfectly.

Of course, I was the guy who didn't want "Better Call Saul" to ruin "Breaking Bad" and that turned out awesome, so what the hell do I know?

BTW: Nit to pick: Anybody got any idea how much the all-night strategy call from NYC to Moscow cost in 1970?

I really thought the first two seasons were some of the best television I've seen in several years, but season three seemed to lose its way. I no longer had any interest about which side won - I didn't know or care whether the knot should be cut. I thought that the scene at the end of one episode where Eva read out the names of her team as the camera showed each facer was contrived and didn't make much sense. I'm normally a completist - I will almost always finish a show/book I'm watching/reading just to finish it - but I couldn't finish Dark after that. And I don't mind not knowing what happened.