Raising the standard of living for the poorest people in the world does very little to increase the rate of climate change since these people have very little impact on the environment and consume so little in the first place. I'd argue that we also owe it to them because the poor are also least capable to handle the consequences of climate change and the other issues facing developing nations. I don't know why this needs to be said but those are real issues.
The flaw in Elysium is moral and practical. You have to accept that humans by virtue of being human deserve some consideration, and the well being of society deserves consideration. If a rich person don't believe this then they are irresponsible. Too much inequality in society makes it shittier for everybody for plenty of reasons.
Note taking is not about the time spent with patients. It's about keeping a good record for next time and insurance and is a major reason for physician burnout. Some doctors will finish up charting when after hours.
Yes physicians could still see fewer patients but filling out their mandatory notes is annoying regardless of it's a manageable amount of patients or a work extra hours amount.
The "What has this project been used for?" section in the wigle FAQ is not very compelling tbh. Now that most routers ship WPA-2 secured by default and you can find free wifi everywhere, I think the most valid use that remains is finding malicious networks. But it seems to me that by and large this is nerds doing free work for the people who use their data commercially which seems kind of anti-hacker.
Physician experience is important for patient experience. Doctors are by and large overworked, and respondih to too many patient messages are a major contributor to burnout.
Quitting your job is not an obvious thing for many people. There are so many assumptions for how somebody should quit their job that are baked in to people's minds. I should stay an extra few months for the bonus, I should wait until I have another job. Or you could just... quit.
I'm interested in what the parent doesn't find convincing about this. Seems pretty straightforward to me. There's tons of isolated places we could put nuclear waste in the US.
One thing I've always wondered is how security researchers feel justified in releasing tools like the one in this blog post to the public. I can almost certainly say that the number of bad or creepy uses for an automated email to phone number generating tool massively outweighs the good reasons for having one. Does he get a pass because he's doing this for "research" and it's a grey area anyways? Does he feel better because he talked to the companies who exposed the vulnerability and it's neutered now?
I generally would not do cleared jobs out of ethical concerns. I'm more lamenting that a clearance makes it easy to break into security but otherwise it's not clear how to.
I'm a fairly new computer science graduate and it has been hard to find a cyber security job that doesn't require a clearance. I've done a bunch of ctfs and reverse engineering, but I just don't see many roles out there that are meant to train people like me that will give me an interview. So it's being a programmer for me until that changes.
Yeah Barnes and Noble for me was a third place where I could sit down, read a book, study, read some manga, eat a cookie, spend time. The new design downgrades most of those uses and turns it in to a better place to buy books.
This study seems to be a pretty important one (cited by Harvard in a blog post about alcohol's effects on health). It doesn't necessarily go into preexisting health conditions beyond broad markers like BMI, smoking, and cancer history. It says one of the limitations of the study is that it doesn't account for socioeconomic status, which is probably correlated with general health (can't afford as much alcohol if you're poor and you age less healthily).
I got to ask Scott Kelly why we should send humans to Mars instead of sending up more robots. His response (paraphrased) was:
1. Humans are explorers by nature
2. Humans can do science 100x faster than robots.
3. People will be inspired by Mars missions to go into STEM and even if they don't end up working for NASA, they will likely do other great things.
4. It gives people jobs
The romantic explorers angle seems practically indefensible for the reasons listed in this article. I like the faster science angle the most in theory, but I didn't realize that contamination would be such a big deal.
Major consumer speaker vendors don't make it easy to compare speakers. When I was looking for a portable speaker to play outside I was surprised to see that for most of the speakers you'll find at big box stores, there are no statistics for loudness or how it sounds. The best we get is size and rarely amperage, which I found through trial and error are dubious measures at best. I ended up returning two overpriced soft sounding speakers before the third one was sufficient. Price doesn't make as much of a difference as I thought it would either.
As a consumer, I don't know what to trust because the marketing on these things can be pretty useless.
The flaw in Elysium is moral and practical. You have to accept that humans by virtue of being human deserve some consideration, and the well being of society deserves consideration. If a rich person don't believe this then they are irresponsible. Too much inequality in society makes it shittier for everybody for plenty of reasons.