> When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.
> But, when you think masks, you should think of health care providers needing them and people who are ill... It could lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it.
He said that there's a shortage, and that he didn't trust that people would wear the masks correctly. I remember that most of the early anti-mask guidance I heard was claims that they weren't likely to prevent yourself from getting infected because: the mask would become an infectious surface; and people wouldn't handle the mask as infectious.
> It is mainly to prevent those people who have the virus — and might not know it — from spreading the infection to others.
> U.S. health authorities have long maintained that face masks should be reserved only for medical professionals and patients suffering from COVID-19, the deadly disease caused by the coronavirus. The CDC had based this recommendation on the fact that such coverings offer little protection for wearers, and the need to conserve the country's alarmingly sparse supplies of personal protective equipment.
I agree that the time unit should be in the variable name. The code itself should do a good job of explaining "what" is happening, but you generally need comments to explain "why" this code exists. Why is the test advancing the time, and why are we advancing the time at this line of the test?
networkTimeMs++; // Callback occurs after timeout
timeSec++; // Advance time to check whether dependent properties update
utcTime++; // Leap second, DON'T advance ntpTime
In a performance language your "real types" aren't somehow more expensive and so you should only use the built-in primitives when they accurately reflect your intent. So I would write:
time += Duration::from_millis(1);
But I would expect that "time unit should be in the variable name" is a reasonable choice in a language which doesn't have this affordance, and I needn't care about performance because apparently the language doesn't either.
I also wonder why we've named this variable "time". Maybe we're a very abstract piece of software and so we know nothing more specific? I would prefer to name it e.g. "timeout" or "flight" or "exam_finishes" if we know why we care about this.
There isn't a clear trend to more taxes in the US (scaled to GDP). Federal tax receipts were higher in the 90s (17-20%) than the 00s/10s (14-18%). Local and state receipts have been basically flat at ~8.8%.
Has GDP gone up or down over time? It's gone way up, so even if the percentage was constant, the amount of money collected has increased significantly. This is what I mean by a clear trend towards "not-less". Despite this increase, I don't think we're seeing proportional returns, and I'm very doubtful that increasing it even further will help anything. If the root problem is mismanagement/corruption/inefficiencies/pointless wars, throwing more money at it isn't going to fix anything, while taking money away could.
~60/year of <5yo Australian kids in the 90s, down to ~25/year in the 10s. That's a death rate reduction of ~3/100k, which is about the rate of <5yo deaths from cancer. 50% of the <5yo drownings in '93-'18 were in pools.
HVAC has to account for the BTUs produced by all equipment. An office might have one or two refrigerators per floor, maybe a dishwasher. Apartments will have one in every apartment. Ditto for ovens, dryers. Even computers and TVs.
Offices have a lot more people per m² all of them using computer equipment continuously for 7hrs/day so in my experience they tend to have considerably higher cooling loads. I know from experience that a typical high rise office building in London, UK will have no heating requirement for most of the year; it is in cooling mode most of the time.
You have to account for peak usage, not median. At 7AM and 6PM, everybody has their stove or ovens going to make dinner, plus the washing machines and dryers.
Building codes and practices are different for commercial and residential for good reasons.
They also contain lot less people. Average person generates 70-100W at rest. Add that to what ever screens, computers, extra lighting. And it is not that big difference in load.
That doesn't answer the parent's point. It doesn't really matter whether it's upgraded from a misdemeanor to a felony or not if it doesn't get prosecuted in the first place.
misdemeanors are more likely to be thrown out or never taken to court because of court/jail overcrowding. Felonies are likely to get prosecuted if you have a culprit. Misdemeanors... end up getting asked is this trip really necessary?
> Felonies are likely to get prosecuted if you have a culprit
Maybe, maybe not. From a very brief Google search, in 2022, 8% of felonies were not prosecuted, and of the remaining more than half of felony charges were downgraded by prosecutors to misdemeanors in NYC.
8% not being prosecuted would seem to mean that felonies are likely to get prosecuted, felonies getting downgraded to misdemeanors generally happens in the criminal proceedings process as part of a plea bargain and I would consider that as being "prosecuted" which covers a larger area than just being taken to trial.
It's a combination... DAs wont prosecute misdemeanors - which businesses won't then report... and DAs are also not prosecuting those higher crimes as well - which also means businesses won't report.
Part me of wonders... others are saying "all that theft is employee driven" as a talking point (yeah, I've got my own talking points too. Se'la'vie lol) - how much of it is old data - data from a decade ago before the soft on crime, defund the police crowd took over - and how much of it is employees not reporting crimes that waste everyones time in the current climate.
It'll be interesting to see if we get real data over the years and can look back at this failed experiment on "justice" objectively enough to show what an utter disaster it currently is.
So instead of it being $1000... it's $950... that's like me calling an item $10 when in reality its 9.99. The point still stands.
"Texas" Texas also has stand your ground laws and castle defense... so it's a lot easier to stop criminals. IE: Florida where a sheriff said "We have free gun classes so you can help save tax payers money when defending your property by not missing" (paraphrased).
The point still stands: CA took a $50 limit, bumped it up to $950, elects DAs that don't prosecute misdeamenors - and, as such, store owners don't report crimes that won't lead to prosecutions. Why waste the time? - so when you look at it from a statistical perspective? Oh look... crime numbers are down.
Never mind that more stuff is being stole on a more consistent basis... the lack of higher level crimes (Fewer felonies) and the lack of prosecutions (Why prosecute a misdemeanor as a DA... and why report stuff to police that won't get prosecuted as a business owner...) look better on paper but businesses and people are more unsafe than ever.
The "better ways" listed in this book were often worse at the metrics the old solution was targeting. They won out because they gained flexibility by loosening requirements. Personal computers were worse than minicomputers, but they were so much cheaper that they largely won out. The book is focused on the solution provider, not the consumer. The old providers lose out because they don't understand what the consumer values. OP is saying that the provider may be misunderstand the problem the consumer has when they offer a simple solution.
The generous interpretation of "suburban America" is that both the author and interviewee live in the suburbs:
> I grew up in Temecula, a California suburb
> his house in Laguna Niguel, in a trim suburban neighbourhood
But the project started off in an urban area:
> In the fall of 2004, Frank [would] drive through the darkened streets of Washington, D.C., with stacks of self-addressed postcards
I think though that "suburban" is playing the same role as "middle-class". Despite the technical definition, I think both terms imply everyday, normal, boring, "real" Americans. I agree this usage is weird and I wish people would stop using "suburban" this way.
I found it a lot easier to understand the harmonic and geometric averages when I learned about the "generalized f-mean". Many averages are arithmetic averages of a transformation of the value. "f" refers to the function which transforms your values. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-arithmetic_mean
- The geometric average is the arithmetic average of the logarithm. It places emphasis on the ratio between numbers, rather than the absolute difference.
- The harmonic average is the arithmetic average of the multiplicative inverse. It averages values by a constant numerator rather than denominator. For example, the average fuel economy of multiple vehicles makes more sense per-distance, so miles/gallon should be rewritten as gallons/mile.
- The (RMS) root-mean-square is the arithmetic average of the square. Electrical power is proportional to the square of the amperage or voltage, so AC current and voltage uses the RMS average to make the power calculations correct.
> When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.
> But, when you think masks, you should think of health care providers needing them and people who are ill... It could lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it.
He said that there's a shortage, and that he didn't trust that people would wear the masks correctly. I remember that most of the early anti-mask guidance I heard was claims that they weren't likely to prevent yourself from getting infected because: the mask would become an infectious surface; and people wouldn't handle the mask as infectious.
Opinions started to shift over March, and the CDC put out guidance on 2020-04-03 to wear cloth masks in public. https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0...
> It is mainly to prevent those people who have the virus — and might not know it — from spreading the infection to others.
> U.S. health authorities have long maintained that face masks should be reserved only for medical professionals and patients suffering from COVID-19, the deadly disease caused by the coronavirus. The CDC had based this recommendation on the fact that such coverings offer little protection for wearers, and the need to conserve the country's alarmingly sparse supplies of personal protective equipment.
I used wikipedia for dates and sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_masks_during_the_COVID-19...