Have a kid…

It’s a matter of perspective and use — high density one place means you can have open space somewhere else, for a given amount of land.

I’d much prefer a few large dense housing complexes, surrounded by green space, than suburban sprawl.

As much as I think a “would you like to have a beer with the candidates?” is a stupid way of measuring things…I wouldn’t mind having a beer with these candidates.

Someone described respectful ways of interacting with children similarly — you can bring yourself down to their level, or you can bring them up to yours. Both are respectful, and there’s no “talking down” to anyone.

I like the sentiment, but there are non-peer reviewed papers that are real science. Politics and funding are real things, and there is a bit of gatekeeping here, which isn’t really good IMHO.

Also, reproducibility is a sticky subject, especially with immoral experiments (which can still be the product of science, however unsavory), or experiments for which there are only one apparatus in the world (e.g., some particle physics).

Reminds me of that West Wing episode where he “accidentally” makes an offensive gun analogy comment; Harris doesn’t really alienate any supporters here, and she appeals to the undecided gun crowd voters. As a bonus, she’s “telling it like it is” for folks who are self-described as being “fed up with PC culture.”

One of the real downsides of ARM is, it seems, the relative lack of standardization. An x64 kernel? It’ll run on most anything from the last ten years at least. And as for boot process, it’s probably one of two options (and in many cases one computer can boot either legacy or EFI).

ARM, on the other hand…my raspberry pi collection does one thing, my Orange Pi does something else, and God help you if you want to try swapping the Orange kernel for the Raspberry (or vice versa)!

When I took some astronomy classes in the early 2000s, Jocelyn Bell was absolutely credited. In her own words:

It has been suggested that I should have had a part in the Nobel Prize awarded to Tony Hewish for the discovery of pulsars. There are several comments that I would like to make on this: First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it - after all, I am in good company, am I not!

That said, yeah, I think she absolutely should have been awarded the Nobel prize. But while she did not, she has the admiration — rightly so — of many a budding astronomer.

I just tried that and got the same result. It’s from a site that just quotes a snippet of an Onion article 🤦

Similar with Y2K — it was only a nothingburger because it was taken seriously, and funded well. But the narrative is sometimes, “yeah lol it was a dud.”