That... it the strangest thing. That makes literally no sense. Why on earth?
It's not like when Netflix FIRST arrived in NZ it was without "Orange is the New Black" because they'd licensed the rights to that off to a local TV station earlier, but the latest season?
I'm assuming there wasn't some stupid deal where they'd sold first broadcast rights to a local provider?
Likely something like that. They claim "licensing issues", whatever that means. As far as I recall it wasn't available on local TV, but then I don't subscribe to any premium channels.
I haven't really understood why they don't just say that your subscription fee only covers the region in which you subscribe. Then they'd at least get double the subscription fee from someone who uses it in their own country + another country.
That would be rather annoying for people who travel a lot, but Netflix could do something related. They could lock the content to the home address you have given them for payment. Then you can watch from anywhere in the world but your content is locked to your home country.
This is probably one of the driving forces behind their shift towards original content.
Which they also geolock. The last season of House of Cards appeared on US Netflix weeks and weeks before it aired locally. I pay for Netflix, but I still ended up looking on Torrent sites to watch their content without waiting.
Grad students are paid barely above minimum wage, if that. They actually aren't expected to produce *any* research output, and anything they get out of their project is regarded as a bonus.
I don't know what field you're coming from, but that's not the case in neuroscience. Anyone coming out of a PhD in this field with no publications isn't going to be happy with their performance and it will likely count against them in looking for a good Post Doc.
... but the FDA is still finding something to complain about.
I can't see it say anywhere that the diagnostic test from Theranos works. It just says that there are problems with associated protocols. Seems like yet another example of their corner cutting behavior. Theranos doesn't exactly have a good history of producing reliable diagnostic tests.
We, in the west, can not and should not change China to what we feel is the "right" way.
We don't have to "change China" to affect change. We could just not buy from companies which behave unethically. Apple would cease to strong-arm its supplies if it became obvious that doing so led to a decrease in sales and a tarnishing of its brand name.
Yes it is. Why not CSV? These are just data tables.
Every time time humans appear to run up against a resource limitation, we've found ways around it.
This has so far been the case in our recent history. It is not the case in general. There are numerous examples of past civilizations that have declined and disintegrated due to resource depletion. Jared Diamond's "Collapse" provides a great overview of the more prominent examples and is soberly written. The only difference between the past and modern times is that our civilization is now global and we've been able to use technology to stretch resources. That doesn't mean that our behavior is sustainable or that we'll be able to continue coming up with solutions indefinitely to allow for ever-greater resource use. At some point we have to scale back. That will happen either by choice or be forced upon us.
You see population growth is rapidly decelerating, albeit still positive. Hence our impact is likely to be decelerating too.
Population is one factor, the other is per capita emissions and resource usage. It's the latter that's increasing. A common theme in the news recently has been the alarm expressed by scientists at the rapidity with which changes are happening. Nobody is saying that things are progressing at lower than expected rates. They're all shocked at how fast it's hitting home. People can make cute comments about Malthus to imply that there's nothing to worry about, but that's not what we're seeing. Just because Malthus wasn't right in his lifetime, that doesn't make him wrong. Malthus died in 1834: that's really not that long ago.
I've never even heard of this metric. Is this based on real science or climate activism?
Whether or not this particular number is "real" or "climate activism" is somewhat irrelevant. The real science is very clearly telling us that our negative impact on the planet is substantial and that this is accelerating. This is the reason for the activism.
Take it with a grain of salt when Backblaze say a drive is crap since it may only be crap in their very hostile environment, but if they didn't break it then it's very likely to work well anywhere.
What's the typical drive temperature in Backblaze's cases in their environment?
An other point regarding you text.
Any Swiss citizens are equal, and are free to vote directly on each subject without any consideration to the political parties. Might be obvious to any Swiss citizens but it's important to remain this on an international site as this is sadly still today very uncommon around the world.
I'm not really sure where you're going with your posts or why you think I'm saying anything very different to what you're saying, but I'm not sure about this particular statement of yours. In Switzerland you often have referendums on various topics. As you say, you can be affiliated to any political party and vote however you like in a referendum. You then say that this is uncommon elsewhere in the world. What is uncommon? The ability to have a referendum? Or the ability to vote how you like in a referendum. It seems to be the latter, which is clearly not true. I'm confused.
Mediocrity finds safety in standardization. -- Frederick Crane