I am curious what an "expensive" one would actually cost, too... It is a car so already a large purchase. I'd pay a bit more for an accurate thermostat.
It's not just material cost, probably different interface to the sensor so factor in some R&D, approvals, etc. Any time anything, no matter how small or innocuous (bracket, cable, screw, some piece of plastic cover, etc), was changed on a vehicle, it meant a different part number, which meant 6-12 months delay. This is because it has to go through all the testing - usability, fatigue, safety, etc all over again. This is why they pick cheap parts - not because they're cheap, but because they are old and got cheaper over the years, because old = already approved, which makes the lead time a lot less.
Why is it "Forbidden by Gravity" but the "sub-Plankian unknown"? I thought that the Plank length was a hard limit like the speed of light. Is that not true, and there theoretically are unknown features smaller than that?
Plank length is not a hard limit the same way speed of light is. Plank length is where we expect our current models to start producing nonsense, though we fully expect that 'things can happen at smaller than plank length'. The expectation is that there exists some future model that produces meaningful predictions at sub-plank length.
Whereas for speed of light, we currently expect no future models to produce meaningful faster than light predictions, and we fully expect to never find evidence of faster than light predictions.
How could I miss that it's fundamentally part of everyone's martial vows?? /S
Marriage is about love, companionship, and children. Particularly because of children there will always be a significant economic component. But it's not the driver, it's a supporting component.
If selfishness isn't a good general explanation for Pareto distributions, is there a reason that it's particularly explanatory for wealth distribution?
They are choosing to further enrich themselves past what any single person can consume, instead of helping those around them, the definition of selfishness.
You could get the same distribution if everyone is assigned a random amount of selfishness regardless of wealth, but some people are better at achieving their selfish goals than others, or just luckier. How could someone know that the result is primarily due to non-uniform selfishness?
You could measure selfishness in small experimental scenarios and try to correlate it with the wealth of the subjects. Does that evidence exist?
"Using theoretical arguments and statistical tests we find, as in Dagsvik et al.
(2020), that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be strong enough to cause systematic changes in the temperature fluctuations during the last 200 years."
And it's self-reinforcing. I live in a rural county the size of Connecticut with just 5k people in it. The people that choose to live out here are frequently the ones who particularly value that extra freedom ... including law enforcement. It is almost routine here for the sheriff to announce that he will not enforce some state or federal code or another. Talk to a deputy about crime and he'll ask if you have guns, and then recommend that you buy one if you don't.
The county government does little and our property taxes reflect that.
I can and have burned very large piles in my yard, but we're not savages. I have to notify the local volunteer fire department first, or they're libel to show up, and not happily.
I don’t have a particular rural vs. urban point to make, only a general observation about law and freedom: a place where law enforcement feels empowered to ignore the law is a place where law enforcement is effectively the sole power. In effect, a dictator’s prescribed freedom.
>a place where law enforcement feels empowered to ignore the law
In the history of the world, there has never been a law enforcement institution that enforced the rules equally to itself. The same is true of every power structure e.g. governance; financial elites; ...
> a place where law enforcement feels empowered to ignore the law is a place where law enforcement is effectively the sole power
Like New York? The above commenter said law enforcement advised them to get guns which is what I've experienced growing up rural; tyrannical power mongers who are as you said, the sole power, try to take people's guns away.
This equivocation doesn’t make sense: New York has so far respected federal court rulings that repeal its attempts at gun control. You can complain about their attempts, but it seems incorrect to use legislative failures as evidence of selective enforcement.
Or it’s a practical statement on how if you have someone breaking into your house, police may be well over 15+ minutes away if they can rush straight over. Hell, there are quite a few places were response time is going to be measure in hours. Same reason it’s good to have a chainsaw and know how to use it to clear a felled tree on a road, waiting for someone to take care of it for you isn’t always a great plan.
Dictators don’t strike me as generally inclined to recommend having the capacity for self defense. I think you are just trying to come up with the worst possible interpretation of intention.
I agree. Rule of law is critical and requires consistency. But given the choice I'd rather live in a jurisdiction where law enforcement tends to use their discretion in favor of less rather than more centralized control. That bias towards less control seems to be inversely correlated with population density.
We spent 25 years out in the rural West, though we preferred to live in a town.
We left because over the last 15 years the decay of uniform public law enforcement has essentially led to "norms" being enforced by the local landowning elites. And they have certain characteristics that make them highly identifiable. IOW, if you look like them, you get all the space you have said you prefer. If not, well, there's not a lot to limit the potential downsides.
This has also led to a large increase in trash behavior out on the public lands. Lots of new wildcat trails/double track for instance. For us it got pretty uncomfortable a few times in the last 5-6 years. We began to post the shotguns in a highly visible place in the camp, or in the truck. That definitely helped.
I guess that works just as long as according to their discretion that you're "one of the good ones". Folks who are in the out-groups have experienced the tyranny of this "discretion" for generations. Sundown towns didn't disappear as soon as the civil rights act was passed.
Odd, I live in a rural area as well. When I cross the state line into the new york state back country, I literally see garbage piles in some people's front yards. Like they don't wanna pay for garbage collection, so it piles up in their yard for months until they burn it all. The fire dept are all volunteers and don't just randomly show up to a fire unless someone calls it in. We burn wood in the yard for leisure or to get rid of brush, but im more of a get garbage to its place kind of guy.
We have no garbage pickup in the county, we haul it to one of four collection areas. Those cost $140/year plus about $7/100lbs, so no doubt some more thrifty neighbors are burning household trash instead, but I just burn slash and take household trash to the dumpsters.
There's a high fire risk in this area and smoke watchers will report it, and the VFD gets dispatched. They don't respond individually.
He does use them, in fact this is one of the pictures in the article!
The villains catch up to his use of vents though.
I think Die Hard is fair use of this trope, because it popularized or codified it. Back when Die Hard opened, a lot of these tropes were far less common; in fact they've become common because of the movie. Many later action thrillers owe a lot to John McClane.
That’s definitely a missing aspect of the TVtropes dataset - what is the influence timeline of the trope? Which instances are referencing other instances? When did it transition into cliche? When was its tropiness punctured to make it into something that could be parodied or lampshaded?
While I’d agree post-Die-Hard vent spelunking is likely to nod to the Die-Hardness of the situation, the trope had a long life before Nakatomi.
And nearly got killed because of it. On of the bad guys heard him going thru them and ran a line of bullets thru it. The movie was great on tension. At any moment he could die, and die hard.
I once heard a British comedian talk about hiring a hypnotherapist to help him watch the first Harry Potter movie again as if it was his first time. I personally don’t think such precision or efficacy is possible in hypnotherapy, but it’s a fun idea.
This is a great read, and a situation where an astute IT entrepreneur could make a fine business in return for doing much good. The main superhero power needed here is "software developer". I've been in the same position as the author and bounced off of the difficulties almost immediately. People are dying to find a better way to search a .gov site.
