I don't think it's strictly the experience in a memory facsimile, "let me quiz the kids" format that matters. There are a mind boggling number of new and unique data points and methods of delivery kids are exposed to during travel which is really healthy for a developing human mind to have as part of its growth regimen. Travel is one of the last things I will cut if times get tough for our family, before essentials such as food and shelter.
I think it's more trying to make things which vary fit in a "you shall not vary" square box that is the problem. Technically, this metric/decimal method makes more sense for what we're trying to do, but it's less of a "time" thing than it is a "let's have the same numbers every day so we can agree on when synchronous events need to happen." To _measure_ elapsed time, using a fixed unit such as a second is perfectly fine.
> There will be countries like Bulgaria, and there will be countries which will welcome it with open arms
Bulgaria (and Romania, per linked article) were on the receiving end of said dirty tricks. The problem is Western EU trucking companies did not want the much cheaper to operate Eastern EU truckers eating their lunch. The "dirty tricks" did not come from Bulgaria/Romania in this case.
> People are afraid of actually using their batteries, and engaging in FUD about their aging. It's weird.
And some of the same people change cars a year later (talking about EVs, of course — because it doesn't have HW4, 4680s, etc.). Some of it is human nature, though.
What exactly are we calling ales here, isn't ale just beer said another way (or, rather, the other way around)?
Speaking of lagers, good ones are hard to come by these days. I like all things beer, and I enjoy all the IPAs, fruited sours and all that, BUT I also much, much enjoy quality lagers. As it is, in the US, it's rather hard to find good ones, all the mass market ones are horrible (I guess a Stella will work if that's absolutely the best you can do, but everything else is even lower in terms of quality).
I'm in the ironic position that I actually whole-heartedly enjoy IPAs, but hate the IPA fad because it's (mostly, just due to the sheer size of the IPA market) keeping brewers from making good lagers. Can I have both please?
> I hate the IPA fad because it's keeping brewers from making good lagers. Can I have both please?
Yes, of course. Seeing this so much in this thread makes me feel like it's 2012 again. I travel a lot in North America and like to check out the local breweries when I do. There are always plenty of non-IPA options.
Ale yeast and lager yeast are the two different types of beer yeasts. There are a million lines of both, but ale yeast ferments in about a week at 70f and produces esters which have a fruity odor. Lager yeast operates at roughly 55f and takes a month to ferment. Lagers have little odor which some people like.
To me, lagers are like a steak and ales are like chicken tikka. Both are good, and people preferring one or the other is reasonable. Due to tank and cooling requirements, lagers benefit from large scale production.
Something like Sam Adams is a good lager to compare against an IPA. Just smell the difference and decide which you like.
> > “Science is not enough, religion is not enough, art is not enough, politics and economics is not enough, nor is love, nor is duty, nor is action however disinterested, nor, however sublime, is contemplation. Nothing short of everything will really do.” - Aldous Huxley
This is what AGI will go. It will know everything, and at an above best-human level at that.
It's also: not my problem, let someone else deal with it, while I make money NOW and they don't even really know the extent of the problem. It's also how we got here, and we continue to let speculators externalize costs to society at large.
> It's that light from the aircraft travels faster than sound.
For all practical purposes we can say the light reaches the observer instantly, whereas the sound takes some (significant by comparison) amount of time. Over such short distances, and when comparing it to something that is so much slower (299,792,458 m/s vs 343 m/s, 874 thousand times faster), there is no point in measuring the infinitesimal time it takes light to travel the distance from the plane to the observer.
For the general case presented in the article, at the average cruising altitude and speed mentioned within it, the conclusion is that it takes sound from the plane so much longer to reach the observer than the instantaneous light from the plane, that the actual plane itself has traveled another 2.1km in that time. You are (instantly) seeing the current position of the plane but hearing the sound it emitted 2.1km ago.
> I also migrated from CRT to LCD to LED screens, and more recently to e-ink devices when possible.
I too use eInk whenever possible but that's just for reading (a passion of mine). All current computer monitors are LED AFAIK, is there any research tho that it's better for sight, or are you simply stating that you migrated as the technology changed?
I'm thinking that OLEDs are the best looking but one of their weaknesses often mentioned is that they aren't as bright; if you have lots of light (ideally natural sunlight) they may prove to be counterproductive if you have to strain to see due to appearing dim.
