I can't find a reference now, but apparently the first "self-service" store in Australia was the original Coles Variety Store in Smith St, Melbourne, opened in 1914.
Today, Coles is one of the big two supermarket "duopoly" and "self-service" refers to those robotic checkouts that are actually slower and more infuriating than being assisted at the counter to ring-up your purchase. Interestingly, the structure of checkouts now suggests that less shoppers use trolleys than I seem to recall from a few decades ago.
Another piece of trivia: I don't think I've ever seen a plastic trolley in Australia.
> refers to those robotic checkouts that are actually slower and more infuriating than being assisted at the counter
I felt this way until recently. Home depot, which I virtually live at, pushes them really hard. I've gotten to where I enjoy not waiting in line and waiting for the clerk. Part of this is because I've gotten good at it. I can get out quickly.
I really want to see some papers, models or simulations to illustrate some of these effects - starting with the gravitational influence of ice sheets on sea level. This shouldn't be a difficult thing to illustrate numerically, but wow it would have a big impact on how (at least I) perceive the ice sheets.
So far, I haven't been able to dig anything up - there's some prose at [1] but nothing hard. A poster at [2]. Mitrovica's website [3] doesn't seem to have anything. It's late, so I'll have to postpone the search for now, but here's hoping other readers can help me :-).
I find `not in` highly dubious - it makes the expression grammar awkward and harder to parse. Is `not in` a two-token operator? Or is `not` an adverb in this context? What else resembles this?
To cite an alternatice, in Tcl, `in` is an operator and its negation is `ni`. A cute pun and echo of Monty Python that I'm disappointed Python didn't follow :).
You should be happy, as Python 3 would have renamed it to "Ekke Ekke Ekke Ekke Ptang Zoo Boing!"
As to the "what else resembles this"? I would turn it around and ask what else could resemble this. I'm not sure the conclusion would be that "not in" is a good thing, but not sure of the reverse, either:
Well, shell has the '-ne' operator, which is 'not equals' in a terser style.
Really '!=' is just an attempt at rendering '≠' using only ASCII characters. They're a bit like digraphs and trigraphs in C/C++, except everyone is used to them.
I wonder if Unicode is ubiquitous enough now that you could write a language where the real maths operators were used instead. What would that look like?
Scala allows using unicode arrows (→) in place of their ASCII version (->), but not things like '≠'.
I'm currently using the Monoid font (https://larsenwork.com/monoid/), which uses ligatures to achieve the visual effect of things like the not equals symbol, while the underlying code remains the same. It's a pretty nice work-around for current languages.
Another alternative is the way D does it. Its the same idea as `not in` but instead of adding a 2 keyword operator and non-standard usage of negation (`not` instead of `!`) it is simply: `!in`
Container deposit schemes are getting some discussion in the comments, so it seems an apt time to mention their history in Australia [1]. SA has had the scheme since '77, and the NT managed to introduce it - then reintroduce it - just in 2013. No other state presently has such a scheme.
The most disturbing part is what happened in NT. The proposed scheme - which had massive community support - was challenged by beverage manufacturers - Coca Cola, Schweppes and Lion - based on some very dubious claims about it being an expensive and ineffective way to recycle.
In other states it has been a political football: parties support the idea when campaigning, then promptly forget about it once in government. The paranoid part of my brain wonders about behind-the-scenes influence of donors on this pattern.
As a side point, in Asia I'm used to experiencing that a beverage bought in a platic bottle must be consumed on premises, so the bottle can be immediately put in a container for collection. That's a lot more satisfying than having to look for a bin because I got thirsty.
beverage bought in a plastic bottle must be consumed on premises
Interesting.
Beverage waste is huge. My locale recycles aggressively. Including a separate waste stream for compost (for better or worse).
Seeking to further reduce their waste stream, my local university assessed what's what. Something like 50% of the waste by weight is fluids. From sodas, lattes, etc.
Since attending that talk, I was trying to imagine a trashbin that would puncture beverage containers, letting the fluid drain out the bottom.
The more I look at the three snails, the more I find A and C to be similar in their pattern of illumination.
EDIT: the closer I look the more I'm convinced. C is the matte rendering of A; B is the different environment map. Figure 2 in the paper bears me out; I think the authors managed to fool themselves while editing :(.
EDIT#2: make that figure 2A & 2B that bear me out ... 2C they seem to have used the same image twice in the bottom row. Am I mad? I know these errors are easy to make in the rush to publication, but my senses disagreeing with the text in so many places is starting to freak me out!
I came here to make the same comment. Overlaying the images with crossed eyes, you can easily see that snails A and C share the most similar pixels. The mistake is in Figure 1 of the original paper and has been copied to the article.
No need to guess! You're right, A and C are closest - (A-C) shows fewer differences than (B-C). Here are the diffs for the images (with C-C as a sanity check):
Yes. I periodically test with various recipients and mail goes through without a hitch. The only difference I might have versus people starting out fresh is that the domains I host are relatively aged. The newest is two years old and the oldest is nineteen. I also made sure that DNS is set up properly, both forward and reverse, and especially for IPv6.
maybe my sin is hosting at linode - for a new recipient at either of the behemoths, I seem to have 50% chance of going to spam. Thanks for your comment.
I host with linode, and have had generally good results sending mail to gmail. They're definitely not the worst. Granted, I have had SPF enabled for about 10 years.
I just installed this after finally having had enough of SourceTree's broken pointless updates. Not really digging it though. It seems like style over substance. Not enough shortcut keys (e.g. at minimum I want to be able to type my commit message and hit ctrl-enter to commit). Not gonna persevere with this one. The hunt continues.
> Auer and his team measured lifetime marijuana exposure in a fantastic new unit of measurement they call "marijuana-years." Essentially, if you smoke pot every day for a year, that equals one marijuana-year of use. Ditto if you smoke every other day for two years, or once a week for seven years.
That sounds highly suspect.
Interesting study though - the original is linked below for anyone that has access or cares to buy it (bugs me no end that I have to google for the source from articles like this)
I was thrown off by this definition of "marijuana-years" seemingly being used as the base of the study, when we then read this:
>> Few people actually smoke this much pot. Among the 3,385 study subjects, only 311 (8 percent) had more than five marijuana-years of exposure.
The article makes an assumption about how much one's memory would be affected by 45 years of smoking... but if only 311 participants have smoked for even 5 years, it is logically unsound to even pretend to extrapolate that to 45 years.
Why do studies (or perhaps the study itself makes none of these conclusions, and it's just the article) try to overreach on their conclusions? :/
[1] http://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/articles/1901
Today, Coles is one of the big two supermarket "duopoly" and "self-service" refers to those robotic checkouts that are actually slower and more infuriating than being assisted at the counter to ring-up your purchase. Interestingly, the structure of checkouts now suggests that less shoppers use trolleys than I seem to recall from a few decades ago.
Another piece of trivia: I don't think I've ever seen a plastic trolley in Australia.