PrinceWith999Enemies @ PrinceWith999Enemies @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

606

Joined

2 yr. ago

I suspect that it is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

I also suspect that they’d rather have people getting upset over fried rice than the current disease outbreak they’re having.

If that’s your intent you should talk to an estate planner. They can help make sure your plan is on target.

I’m going to simplify things a bit.

Darwin articulated the theory of evolution by natural selection.

It goes like this:

1. Individuals in a community vary in their physical properties. Some may be larger or smaller, faster, stronger, or smarter.
2. This variability can affect the chances for those individuals possessing more favorable characteristics to survive and reproduce better than the other variants.
3. If those physical properties are inherited, then the ones who reproduce more leads to having the next generation of their population having more individuals with that property.

What it boils down to is that evolution is the change in the gene pool of a population over time. Natural selection was the term coined to mean that nature breeds animals and plants just like farmers do - it chooses based on the characteristics it “wants” - by which I mean the ones who survive and reproduce more successfully.

So far, so good.

The problem is that while Darwin was working that out, biology still held to a model that we call “blending inheritance.” They knew that offspring could inherit traits from both parents, and they thought the result was a blend of the two - a short person having a kid with a tall person would produce a medium sized kid, and so on.

Blending is completely incompatible with Darwin’s theory, and he worked really hard to fit that square peg into the round hole. He never did.

The irony is that during this same period Mendel was doing breeding experiments on pea plants, crossing tall with short, or different colors of flowers, and so on. He demonstrated that inheritance is particulate. Rather than a blend, it was a random mixture of alternate individual genes that caused the variety in the offspring. Basically, if you cross a plant with wrinkled peas with one with smooth peas, half the offspring will be wrinkled and half smooth. You don’t wind up with plants that had semi-wrinkled peas or which have a mixture of both. Unfortunately for Darwin, Mendel’s work remained undiscovered for decades. (I’m not sure whether wrinkled is actually a 50/50 or not, I’m just using that as an illustration).

It wasn’t until the 1940s that the two biggest ideas in biology were brought together in what’s called the modern synthesis. That’s where we began what could be considered modern evolutionary biology.

Mendel was extremely fortunate to have been working with plants that showed dominant and regressive characteristics so clearly.

I’d like to see community merging as an option on the client side. I would like to see a combination of multireddits (so that all of the various /news subs were presented to the user as /news), and that multiple posts around the same article could have their posts merged transparently.

This way, the system could still respect the rules of federation (eg defederated hosts wouldn’t appear) and users would on top of that be able to choose which /news subs they wanted to see as unified.

The most amusing bit was where they said they could send a student home for wearing a top with spaghetti straps but they could not require the students to wear face masks because that would violate their rights. Fun times.

If your employer discovers you lied on your resume, you’re going to get fired. He not only blatantly falsified his biography in order to make himself a viable candidate, he then used his campaign as a grift for his personal enrichment.

Just like with Trump, I don’t think “precedent” applies here, because the actions they took were without precedent. At any other time, these people would have resigned in shame or been pushed out by their party. Nixon only left office when it became obvious he would be removed from office in a bipartisan vote. The current gop is going to make sure that never happens again.

Precedent would have seen Santos (and others) resign. I don’t think we realized how much of our government’s power was built around the idea of good faith, but since Trump that’s been completely destroyed. The new precedent needs to recognize that the entire game has changed.

I don’t know his district, but from what I remember having read when he won the seat, it’s a pretty purple-to-blue area. Santos will have given the gop a black eye for those voters, and I’d be surprised if the swing voters didn’t go back to the Dems for at least the next round.

Given how long this has taken to come about, I hope that they have someone lined up and ready to go. Getting him out now not only reduces the gop majority but also sets up a race that is probably going to heavily favor the Dems. It’s theirs to lose, although they’ve certainly fumbled on that one before.

You have to set boundaries. She’s going to keep on doing it until you teach her not to, and she’s more likely to do so to other people as well.

Give a sharp “Ow!” and do it in a high pitched voice. Then give her a sharp “No!” Then the play stops. You’re giving three types of reinforcement there - the yelp is for letting her know she hurt you (do this even if it didn’t hurt), saying “no” helps her to understand what she was doing was not the correct behavior, and withdrawing the fun is the punishment part.

It sounds like you also might need general obedience training. If she’s good around other dogs I’d consider obedience classes where you can work with her under the guidance of a trainer.

You can try training her on your own, too, but get a good up to date book on training. Use treats for positive reinforcement. At a minimum, for her safety and for yours, she should learn the commands for sit, stay, and come. I’d also do “give” meaning she has to let you take the stick (or whatever) out of her mouth, and I also like to train away food guarding behavior (you should be able to pick up their food bowl while they’re eating and not have them bite or growl.

The cat poop one is not a fight you’re going to win, but the rest of it should be solvable. At the very least, if you catch her going for it, a sharp “No” and calling her back to you to get a treat should work, but she is going to keep doing it if she can get away with it. I’d start with the basics and then work on the poop eating.

There’s a very good podcast called Behind the Bastards that did an extremely expansive profile on him covering (iirc) his childhood to his retirement.

It would have been something like 2005 or so. It may have been a known fact at the time, but they mentioned specifically that they were caught by surprise by the phenomenon. I didn’t fault them for it - the whole project was kind of a mess. I’m a biologist and I wasn’t aware of that, so it wouldn’t have occurred to me, either.

That’s weird though. You’d think they would have had multiple botanists on the design team who could have pointed that out.

I do not use TikTok, but I’m interested in what you see as a multitude of legal reasons why they should be banned from the US?

I remember sitting in on a briefing from the Biosphere folks when they reached out for collaborating institutions. One of the things that stuck with me was that they discovered that trees that were not subject to wind failed to develop a healthy trunk and tended to fall over and die. That’s not something that the researchers had even thought of.

I suspect that there’s going to be a lot of that.

This is my answer as well.

We have developed intuition around things like naive physics - you can catch a thrown frisbee without doing calculus in your head - but it’s really, really hard to think through statistical questions in an intuitive way.

It’s one reason I’m extremely skeptical about the utility of informed consent in medicine. A physician can tell a patient’s family that if they don’t do the procedure then the patient will definitely die, but if they do it there’s a 20% chance of complication A and a 5% chance of complication B. The right thing to do is plan on the complications happening and having a realistic idea of what that will entail. But people, especially under stress, really aren’t able to deal with that kind of thing as easily as they can deal with catching a ball thrown to them.

The thing about ICBMs is that you can’t actually use them. You can rattle your saber until your arm gets tired, but the minute the balloon goes up, your country itself will cease to exist.

So the Kremlin would have to make a decision between giving back Crimea and losing all of Russia. The war was sold as a quick stroll in the park - they didn’t even have their supply lines planned and they chose to just go ahead and wing it, which resulted in those hilarious pictures of 30 mile long column s of tanks and trucks running out of fuel.

Now what they’re dealing with is avoiding a loss of face that could lead to the same kind of government collapse that brought down the USSR. And the thing is that NATO doesn’t even need strategic weapons to make it happen. I strongly suspect NATO would go to war over Finland, and it would be a very one sided fight.

It shifted from a quick grab to try to steal territory based on the theory that they’d be able to just get away with it, to a war that will decide Putin’s fate. I strongly suspect that if he were to make a call that would end the existence of Russia as an entity, there would be someone who would do to Putin what Putin did to so many others.

We will always cherish our memories of you, Dumbledore.

I’m not sure how many confirmed instances there were, but when Stalin wanted you gone, he not only killed you, but he photoshopped you out of all of your pictures. You were quite literally disappeared.

He who controls the past controls the future.

He who controls the present controls the past.

I completely agree. I suspect that we’re seeing them trying to avoid the sunk cost fallacy, but there may be political decisions there, too. My partner was in the industry, and there’s a lot that goes on (literally in this case) behind the scenes.

I was more just observing that what we might be seeing (on a much smaller scale) is the .com collapse when the free money dried up. I don’t think it’s going to be as big a dislocation as that was, but I do think that studios will both increasingly look to either bundle with other services or license their content out to third parties (like Netflix), as well as draw down some of the more speculative investments.

Personally, I want to live in a world where Our Flag Means Death gets made and studios take chances on shows like Hello Tomorrow, but I do suspect that a new balance is going to have to be discovered.

Air travel was very expensive back then relative to the average household income. If you’re willing to pay for business class today, you’ll be basically in the same position as those folks in the first photo, and be paying about as much (relatively) as they did.

It’s still available, but you’re not going to get it for the price of a super saver economy ticket. It’s an apples to oranges comparison.

This is to be expected. When there was a ton of free money, studios could go nuts. They got greedy with the idea that every studio should have its own streaming service so they could earn more profits than by just licensing their content to Netflix. They also realized that they needed an exclusive collection to draw people in and keep them subscribed. In order to make that work, even in the free money environment, they grossly underpaid the talent and tech workers who were actually creating the content. By doing so, they could just throw it all against the wall to see what sticks. We did get some very good shows out of it, but also a lot of crap got made.

I think we’re going to see a lot of cancellations and a reduction in new shows, while the studios look to do spin offs or extended series. I also think that they’re going to re-evaluate the profitability of licensing versus owning the whole stack.

Choose a leader

I didn't know we had a King. I thought we were an autonomous collective.