Just going to throw some knowledge in here before we get too many people lamenting that college should be about education and how money could be better spent elsewhere. Most universities pay for their athletics programs through tickets to events, money from wealthy donors, and sponsorships. In most cases, if you took away the athletics from a university you'd just be removing a source of entertainment for students, alumni, and fans. For most, there would be a net zero change in how much is spent on the university.
Another thing to remember is that 99% of all student athletes are never even going to sniff being a professional athlete. Most don't even really have professional leagues they can join. These athletes are getting a huge opportunity to get college paid for and, hopefully, gain an education that benefits them later.
The outliers - like Alabama, Miami, USC, Notre Dame, etc. - are just that. They make millions and reap those rewards at the expense of the smaller schools who can't keep up with the Joneses. This ruling, even though it is fair to athletes, will have major repercussions on the state of college sports, and without a major overhaul of the system we will see cutbacks in many programs as we saw when Title IX - another fair ruling - went into effect.
The duct tape scene is not right, there is a youtube video [0] from a physicist and astronomer that explains pressure suits (which the duct tape would provide). He surmised that they had a minimum of a minute to do their work, and certainly wouldn't have been leaking blood all over the place.
The other trope that For All Mankind really fumbled on was the decompression of the space station (I'm avoiding spoilers for those that don't know why). It followed the trope of massive amounts of air continuously rushing out of the station when that can only happen when there is a massive amount of air available to continuously feed the decompression. In reality, it would be a short rush of air to vacuum as the window was large enough for most to escape very quickly.
The Expanse handles this stuff much better than other shows, as has been noted many times. As entertaining as it is, For All Mankind gets things very wrong in a lot of cases and falls prey to a lot of the 'space tropes' that plague sci-fi. And I certainly don't expect hard sci-fi realism everywhere, but in something like For All Mankind, which is supposed to exist in an alternate timeline but be firmly planted in the real world, it's jarring. When it's in something like the movie Event Horizon I really don't care about realism.
It is 'magic' but a really interesting concept. It's essentially a self-replicating terraforming device. An ancient civilization sends out probes with the molecule - in this case a small planetoid - that will hopefully crash into a planet with biological material and then collect and convert said material into a ring that connects to an interstellar network. The problem is that the one in The Expanse got caught up in Jovian system, like gets done with a lot of interstellar objects.
Not just while the wood is drying, wood 'movement' is something woodworkers have to take into consideration in almost every project. Everyone lives in an environment with humidity (some more than others) and when seasons change solid wood will expand and contract. Plywood is very stable with respect to humidity.
With my knowledge as a non-professional woodworker, there's not a lot to cabinets. Even professionally made cabinets use veneered plywood for the bases so what IKEA does isn't any different than almost all cabinets here in the US. The US mostly uses 'framed' cabinets instead of European 'frameless' cabinets, but the cabinet box is essentially the same.
The government doesn't want it's citizens to horde money. A ton of money sitting in the bank or in assets doesn't really do anyone any good. An inheritance tax pushes the rich into using their money - instead of leaving your kids cash and assets, you leave your kids a company or something similar. They can either continue to own the company and get paid for it or sell it and get taxed on it. Regardless, a company that provides jobs is a much more interesting prospect to the gov't than just rich people with assets.
Isn't the main security feature of hashing that you hash against a salt and that no one but the server knows the salt? Once you send the salt to the client (and anything on the client should be considered insecure) you give the ability to generate lookup tables for common passwords. Without the salt it's much harder to brute-force the password.
Why would used cars drop in price? Since no one is buying new cars there's no supply of used cars. Lower supply means increased prices but demand is probably down as well so almost no change.
As someone who went through the last downturn, this isn't looking good in the same ways. Back then I was on a contract that had just completed and as soon as the housing market collapsed all the VC money dried up, established companies did some purse-tightening which included layoffs, and there wasn't a job available to even apply to for almost 6 months.
I work in a more downturn-resistant company now and I should be alright since we were going to be working on some internal projects for the next 6 months or so anyways. But you never know. Any expenses I have at this time are being heavily scrutinized because, like last time, things are going to take 6 months to shake out.
Just FYI, the local area code and Jenny's number (867-5309) is a default that exists for most loyalty programs. So if you don't want to be tracked you can use that. I've heard that this was implemented for military folks who tend to be a lot more transient than regular locals.
Another example people use for the KISS principle is of the 'space pen', where the US spent thousands/millions developing a pen that works in space whereas the Soviets used a pencil. However, almost none of the story is true. Regardless, it gets repeated over and over.
I'm not OP, but I'd guess its because there is a really limited market for mattresses. People of course need and want them, but the turnover is (or can be) a very long time. I have a mattress in our guest bedroom that I used in college, over 20 years ago. It could probably be replaced, but will probably only get replaced with our main mattress when we replace it. It's fine for the minimal guests we have or when my wife or I sleep in it when we are sick (and don't want to keep the other awake).
So for mattresses you really can't afford low margins if you want to stay in business. I can't imagine mattress stores sell more than several mattresses a month. As for why Casper and Purple mattresses are so much when you are supposedly removing the middle-man (the physical stores), I'm not sure. Because they can? I don't really understand why someone would buy one of their mattresses that you can't test out at a store, when you can pay the same price at a store and test out all your options.
It's an interesting conundrum - where does skill end and technology pick up the slack? This has played out so many places from the speedsuits in competitive swimming, to space-age materials used for baseball bats and golf clubs, and now running shoes. While these things probably won't help the average Joe much, even a minute change at the top end can mean the difference between millions of dollars in winnings and sponsorships.
There's a CG video of the last 24 hours of Pompeii[0] which shows how the city was completely wiped off the map. It's probably one of the best ways to visualize the disaster and aftermath.
Like I implied, yeah, it would be fine with a lot of people. But that's not the same as buying 100 coins for $100 and then those coins are worth $10k each and you're a millionaire. That big multiplier is what got people interested in the first place, but it's gone. The equivalent of that now (with coins at $9.3k) is 100 coins at $933k. Sure, to make a million you just need to just over double the bitcoin price but you need almost a million dollars to make that happen.
The problem with the Bitcoin game is there is no longer the 'millionaire overnight' scenario as a possibility. Sure, you could buy 1 coin and it could go up 10x, yet you'd still only be (at this time) $90k richer. Which isn't bad but the big climb from decimal places up to full dollars is where there was more possibility. Common folks can take a gamble on 100 coins for $1 a piece, they really can't take a gamble at $3k+ per coin. Thus, that's why we sit in the $3k to $9k range. Too few people to join, too many people holding on because they bought at a higher price.
I also don't think psychologically people want to own a decimal place of something but that's a different issue. If people could still buy 100 bitcoins, they'd probably do so.