> People focusing on colonizing Mars when we have such an immediate problem to address TODAY are delusional and actively endangering the most vulnerable people in the world.
I don't agree with the logic that we cannot focus on two things at the same time. It's like saying, "People focusing on making movies when we have such an immediate problem to address TODAY are delusional and actively endangering the most vulnerable people in the world." or "People focusing on curing fibromyalgia when we have such an immediate problem to address TODAY are delusional and actively endangering the most vulnerable people in the world."
The bottleneck to reversing climate change is not money or manpower, it is politics. We cannot force other people (especially in other countries) to do the right thing for the environment. We can, however, do our best to improve things on our side and pressure others to do so as well. And while we are putting our best effort towards that, we shouldn't stop making art, researching medicine, or even, trying to colonize mars.
Also, the research and development needed to colonize Mars may very well yield scientific discoveries that allow us to reverse climate change. And even if it doesn't, and Earth is ruined despite our best efforts here, we won't have all our eggs in one basket.
My point is, I just do not believe that researching colonization of Mars will do anything to thwart our efforts to improve the Earth. Quite the contrary, it may help those efforts.
> I don't agree with the logic that we cannot focus on two things at the same time
This times a million. I see it all the time on social media when it comes to news stories too, and it's as ridiculous there as it is here. People have different interests and skillsets, and they don't all need to focus on the same thing at the same time. The folks looking to explore Mars colonisation/space exploration and those working to slow down or prevent climate change are usually entirely different groups, who have studied what they're interested in for years. You can't just chuck them all at a single 'project' and refuse to allow anything else, in the same way we can't pause the rest of human civilisation because your pet issue isn't being sorted quickly enough, or have the entirety of a media organisation reassigned to a single story.
Fiber can help form stool if you have chronic diarrhea, but it can also help relieve constipation.
You are correct that diuretic refers to peeing; what the poster was probably trying to say was "laxative." And foods high in fiber and sugar can certainly work as laxatives!
Jeez, it's just an expression. They're just saying that it would be way easier to not have to worry about kids at home right now. You're reading way to far into it. They are not saying that they would literally want to trade places, which should be obvious from the statement "I wouldn't give up my kids for anything"
> Preventable medical error is almost certainly in the top 5 causes of deaths in the united states.
This is untrue, a very common myth based on a questionable study out of Johns Hopkins, which included known complications of medical procedures in the classification of "medical error."
I won't argue for or against marijuana, but I disagree with your argument.
Some drugs are capable of permanently transforming a "sane" individual into one with psychosis or other permanent mental disorders. Even alcohol has been shown to have this effect in some heavy long term users. It's even more common in meth users. It is not "pure bullshit."
> Yay because arguably it's the only way doctor offices are going to keep up with ever changing tech.
Keeping up with the tech is not the problem, it's keeping up with the ever changing regulations, many of which do relate to EHR. You basically need dedicated staff to handle the bureaucratic processes, which is only affordable for large organizations.
> * 3a has a headphone jack. Personally, I adjusted pretty well to Bluetooth headsets but some people really appreciate the jack.
For me, phones lacking a headphone jack is an absolute deal-breaker; the result is that I feel that there is a limited selection for new phones. This feature alone makes the 3a a huge upgrade regardless of the other features.
And they even had the audacity to tease Apple about the headphone jack being still present on the 1st Pixel just to remove it themselves on the 2nd and 3rd.
If your hand is forced to go wireless I can recommend the Fiio BT receivers. You can keep using your favourite headphones, sounds pretty good, far cheaper than BT headphones.
I know, I know—of course you have to charge it, no crap, but this is why Bluetooth will never be a replacement for me. It's too much extra complication in my life. I just want a pair of headphones that I can throw into my pocket and will never need to be charged and will work with all my devices without any additional adapters.
>Support for Bluetooth 5.0 and SBC/AAC/aptX/aptX LL audio codecs
Wow! That's excellent (no mention of aptX HD, though). I wonder how much of the purchase price is going in licensing fees though. AAC requires one, aptX requires one, plus DRM.
A nice pair of bluetooth headphones makes a pretty big different. I got a HD 4.40BT, and it's very good. Battery life is impressive and charges quickly. I can skip tracks, pause, adjust volume without taking out my phone. I don't have to dig into my pocket when I want to listen to something. Audio quality is not noticeably different from my wired headphones at a similar price. It does mean that I have 4 pairs of headphones relegated to desktop and piano use, but the convenience factor was well worth it to me.
For an actual set of headphones with a decent size battery, they can still be useful for many years even if the capacity drops to 50%. Tiny things like AirPods are crazy though. When they're brand new the battery life is barely enough, when they're a year or two old it sounds like a giant nuisance.
Apple just launched the more fitness-targeted Powerbeats Pro with a bigger battery, but the charging case to accommodate the "around ear" design is enormous compared to AirPods.
And now reviewers are excusing that saying "Yeah it's a huge case, but the battery life is probably good enough that maybe you could leave the case at home!" As if the battery life three years from now will be anywhere near 9 hours.
EDIT: Two articles posted on 9to5mac by literally the same person a couple of months apart:
> But batteries are consumable, we all know so well now, and that’s proven true for the tiny batteries inside AirPods after two years of daily use. Battery life that once exceeded five hours now struggles to power AirPods through three hours of continuous usage at the same volume. Battery life results can be cut in half if you need to play audio at a louder volume.
> In practice, I used to never hear the low battery alert during usage. I rarely listened to audio with AirPods for five straight hours before charging in the carrying case without thought. More recently, I’ve heard the bloop sound much more regularly, frequently followed by AirPods dying before I’m ready to recharge.
> AirPods give you up to 5 hours of power in between charges; Powerbeats Pro almost double that with up to 9 hours of power in between charges. The additional four hours might mean you only need to take the earphones out of the house for the day with the charging case left at home.
Talk about a lack of foresight.
On 9to5mac in 2021: "The batteries in my Powerbeats Pro only last four hours and I have to carry this gigantic charging case everywhere. HOW COULD I HAVE KNOWN???"
And for a comparison point versus real headphones, Sony’s USB-C charged WH-1000XM3 is rated for 30 hours with noise cancellation on, 38 hours without. But those aren’t something I’d carry around all the time, so I’m happy to keep using wired earbuds where battery life isn’t even a question.
Did you really mean 'literally decimated'? See the Roman history that led to this word. I share the disambiguation to show other uses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation
Aww man, that just took me down memory lane. Minidisc was, imo, the peak of portable music players. Huge capacity, swappable/tradeable media, excellent sound quality, the little inline screen you mentioned. A quick Amazon search shows they're still available.
Three button inline controls usually gets you pause, volume up and volume down. This is essentially 5 buttons: pause, forward, back, volume +, volume -. Sure there are probably wired headphones that have the same control capability, but I've encountered them rarely if ever.
And I've gone through at least three 3-button headphones that have only worked with volume and pause. I suppose one could use the volume for track control with some sort of special logic, like a longer button hold. But I've never encountered that. The Bluetooth headphones I have actually has another set of capabilities which is to not only skip or go back in terms of tracks but also fast forward and rewind within a track - very useful for podcasts.
The standard iPhone headphones since the 1g support all those. Click to pause, double click for forward, triple click for back. Long press on the second or third click for rewind/fast forward.
5 logical buttons with 3 physical buttons was something of a standard since time immemorial - the volume+/- buttons doubled up as next/previous when you held them.
And how long will it be very good? Bluetooth headphones seem to represent a huge change in standards of support.
To use an example from the same company, I have an HD 280 pro, which I bought well over a decade ago. I can go on Sennheiser's website, and buy replacement ear cushions or replacement head band pads. It looks like the replacement cable is no longer easily available, but it was sold for a number of years, and replacing the proprietary cable (criticized in many reviews at the time) with a standard one (or a jack) is not that hard.
For a new example, all parts that might break outside the core of my Etymotic ER4SRs have replacement parts, and all can be very easily replaced.
A search for replacement batteries for the HD 4.40BT, on the other hand, comes up with nothing except the user manual's admonition that battery replacement by anyone other than Sennheiser will void the entire warranty (something that seems likely to be illegal in many places), and noting that instructions are available (outside of warranty) only for "qualified service centers." There are instructions in the manual about replacing the ear pads, but ear pads don't seem to show up on Sennheiser's website, which is rather surprising, considering that a search for the 2000s-era 280s easily comes up with replacements; wider searches come up only with poorly-reviewed cheap third party replacements. There is a replacement cable, but then again, it's just a standard cable. Replacement batteries don't appear to be available anywhere.
So when the battery starts dying, are you expected to throw them away? Use them until you become frustrated enough to buy new ones, and throw the otherwise decent ones away? Hope that Sennheiser will replace the battery for less than the price of new headphones?
I agree with you here. I am also negative on loss of the headphone jack, but switching to primarily wireless audio has had quite a bit of network-effect positive benefits.
Easily 4-5 days without recharging, with consistent use throughout the day. Official estimate is 25 hours of continuous use, I get around 20.
I just charge my headphone where I charge my phone, and never worry about batter life. Even if battery is reduced to 50% capacity it wouldn't affect my usage.
Meanwhile, 20 hours would be irritating to me on long days, and 10 hours (probably a few hundred cycles/less than a year) would interrupt my work and concentration daily. Just goes to show how the inconvenience varies between people.
It's telling that the marketing page doesn't highlight the headphone jack even though it's a feature that most people want and most reviewers note. They don't want to admit that they "bravely" (stupidly) jumped off a bridge twice in a row with the Pixel 2 and Pixel 3 just because their supposed competitor did it.
That's what I thought too, but then I just bought enough $10 usb-c to headphone dongles for all of the headphones I usually use (one at home, one at work one in the car and one in my backpack). iPhone dongles work on the Pixel too.
Sucks to have to pay $40 just to restore the functionality of the headphone jack, but kept it from being a dealbreaker.
So true! When I got my Pixel 2 XL I wanted to bite my a for not having checked for a jack upfront. It kind of works with an adapter, I still prefer jacks so.
Specialist doctors do not make 1 million dollars (exceptions are generally those who run/manage their own business, or run a hospital - basically it's their business role that puts them at that salary range). You can easily look at job ads and see common salaries for different specialties, they very dependent on specialty but they do not even approach 1 million.
Twice this claim is made with no reference. If there are plenty, it would not hurt to cite a source, rather than make a seemingly baseless claim to the contrary.
You can also look at public incomes of physicians in for example, transparent california. Single phsyician practices with over 1mil in income is pretty common.
the only way a specialist makes more than 200k is:
1)owns a significant interest in a surgicenter
2)is a dermatologist
3)is an administrator
4)works to death (>100 hrs a week and dont forget the on call)
Reimbursement is set by the fed (medicare rates) and ins cos base their rates off of that.
It would of course take a hell of a lot of variance for a significant percentage of doctors to be pulling in a million plus. With 713,000 working doctors, there will be a fair number pulling in lots more than average.
This may be workable for a certain subset of projects, but programmers often have much more on their system than the end user. End users don't need a bloated IDE, an SQL server, an HTTP server, etc all running at the same time. Trying to run all of these programs on an old computer is of zero benefit to the process. Better to give programmers a new machine with remote desktop access to a slower computer/virtual machine that they can use to test out their software.
You could easily argue the opposite as well. Developers don't need an IDE, a SQL server, an HTTP server, etc running on their device at all. The choice is to use a bloated IDE that most people only use a small fraction of the features for. The servers could all run on a dev server and compile/test cycles can be done on similar servers.
Mind you I don't necessarily agree with all of this. Well except the IDE part, Vim and Emacs are tools that more people need to learn.
> The servers could all run on a dev server and compile/test cycles can be done on similar servers.
In every case I've had a dev db running on a shared test server, that DB has been woefully underspecced for the purpose and often in a datacenter with 300ms latency from the office over the company VPN.
While production instances are in the same datacenter as the production DB with 5ms latency.
I don't agree with the logic that we cannot focus on two things at the same time. It's like saying, "People focusing on making movies when we have such an immediate problem to address TODAY are delusional and actively endangering the most vulnerable people in the world." or "People focusing on curing fibromyalgia when we have such an immediate problem to address TODAY are delusional and actively endangering the most vulnerable people in the world."
The bottleneck to reversing climate change is not money or manpower, it is politics. We cannot force other people (especially in other countries) to do the right thing for the environment. We can, however, do our best to improve things on our side and pressure others to do so as well. And while we are putting our best effort towards that, we shouldn't stop making art, researching medicine, or even, trying to colonize mars.
Also, the research and development needed to colonize Mars may very well yield scientific discoveries that allow us to reverse climate change. And even if it doesn't, and Earth is ruined despite our best efforts here, we won't have all our eggs in one basket.
My point is, I just do not believe that researching colonization of Mars will do anything to thwart our efforts to improve the Earth. Quite the contrary, it may help those efforts.