I find it sad how much people try to project their own side of unrelated fights onto situations like this. There are some relevant debatable issues about art and involvement of companies. But others tried very hard to turn it into a men's rights vs. feminism thing when that had little to do with the original issues. Others try very hard to turn this into a left vs. right thing, which has looked especially ridiculous to me after seeing people arguing both, "Obviously the right want the Fearless Girl statue removed while the left defend it" and "Obviously the left want the Fearless Girl statue removed while the right defend it." It seems almost selfish that people need to rope unrelated issues into bolstering their own wars, when there is no shortage of actually relevant things to fight over in those wars.
The diseases, at least the ones mentioned in the summary, are all generic in origin. For most genetic conditions you're not going to find a simple drug that can permanently cure a disease rooted in your body having bad instructions on how operate or build itself. Hence you can't have the conspiracy, in those cases, of cures being hidden to allow on going treatment s instead. There may be other ways of treating genetic defects which does have huge amounts of current research, but still needs a lot more fundamental work.
A quality of knife is not determined by how sharp it is, but by how long it stays sharp and/or how easy it is to sharpen, and in part how comfortable it is to use. You can take just about any modern piece of steel and make it sharp, but if you have to spend a lot of time resharpening it every couple uses, that is no good. Woodworkers joke about tools advertised as sharp is a red flag... since any woodworker going to sharpen the tool many times anyway, but not every tool will stay sharp long enough. And there is some matter of preference if you want a knife with harder steel that lasts a lot longer but takes more effort to sharpen, vs. a softer steel that is easier to sharpen but dulls quicker.
Regardless, the knives I've seen at dollar stores had such huge gouges in the blade, you would spend a lot of time or need power tools to sharpen it. A couple of them also had such horrible handles that you could cut yourself on the metal protruding from the badly cast plastic handles.
You don't need to spend a lot on a knife, as you can get some cheap ones at a restaurant supplier that might not be pretty, but will be easier to sharpen and stay sharp longer. Used knives can be cheap and easy to sharpen as long as they aren't dinged up. But that is a long ways from saying the cheapest knives are good enough just because they can be sharpened.
Quite a lot of them do. Some hackers that are in the news we're honestly trying to help (this is not an example of that) but suffer from cases of attacking the messenger. Plenty of those that do bad things as teenagers go on to do other things( usually reforming, but not always). I've lost count of the number of CS, math, and other science researchers I've worked with that have done such things when younger, and those are just the ones that admit to it.
There have been a couple times I've needed to brush on a coating, but wanted the fast drying version only found in a spray can. For these situations, a coworker once showed me how to cut open a spray can reasonably safely, which then allows the best of both worlds in those odd situations.
I (or the projects I work for) haven't paid a cent for any of the papers I've published. The only way you can be charged money, at least for the journals I've worked with, is if you go over the page limit (and the editor doesn't reject the paper for length), you insist on color figures being printed in color instead of being color online only, or you pay for open access (which is unnecessary usually for fields that can use Arxiv).
Of the places I'm familiar with, they are tiny suburbs or enclaves of cities with large research universities and tech industry. It is easy to have a high percentage of degrees if your town only has higher end homes and is in an area with demand for people with degrees.
How is this house different than any other flammable structure in that regard? Short of some physical barrier, any structure made of flammable material can be lit on fire by someone walking by.
Technical jargon is created and define to be useful. Sometimes words diverge from common use or even other fields, e.g. metal is defined very differently in stellar astronomy from chemistry and common use, because it is more useful that way in that field. There are many different ways to group the bodies in our solar system, some groupings more useful to specific areas of research than others. At the end of the day, whatever definition is given to planet, no science is changed, only the words used to write about the science. This means some papers will get to use a single word to describe the grouping relevant to that situation, while others might have to use a qualifier or a couple words. Spending more time on the debate than it would save in such writings is mostly a waste, with the exception of some arguable public outreach.
Light bulb lifetime drops really fast with higher filament temperature, but efficiency also goes up fast with temperature too as relatively less light is wasted on IR. Want a bulb to last a long time? Use a bulb below it's rated voltage, and get a rough service bulb if it is going to moved or be turned on and off a lot. But expect to spend more on the electricity than you would spend on bulbs. As electricity got more expensive, the sweet point between spending too much on electricity vs new bulbs meant making more efficient cheap bulbs that last shorter.
If you burn zinc compounds, I hope your chimney does its job, otherwise the fumes could be quite bad for you. Zinc fumes and smoke can cause zinc shakes (aka metal fume fever in general), which is seen with welders that don't remove the zinc from galvanized pieces.
I didn't say they were fostering them. But what you described as bad and idiotic is involved in fostering, a practice actively pursued by many rescue and SPCA type organizations. That would be a lot more than just me disagreeing with you. Adopting an animal instead of fostering does not change the impact to the animal: what is good for fostering isn't magically bad for adoption. This is why many adoption agreements have special provisions for the first 6-12 months.
I think your attitude in this situation is actually damaging and can potentially cause harm by pushing an unrealistic view of how rescuing animals can work. The first week or two can tell you a lot about an animal, but people need to be prepared for changes or difficulty on longer timescales. Chiding people that may have been trying very hard to do the right thing isn't helping anyone, unless the goal was to just find someone to call an idiot online for no particular reason.
If giving a detailed criticism of why a hammer is a bad screwdriver, don't be surprised when someone doesn't rebut the details while saying you've missed the point.
Caribbean martial arts falls on a continuum between fighting style and dance, while pigeonholing it as either amounts to a severe misunderstanding. Efficiency and practicality is not necessarily the goal and can take a back seat, especially toward the dance end of the spectrum. You can criticize a training aid as being useless in a fight, but you end up looking like someone criticizing chess by saying how useless chess pieces are in a foxhole.
Regardless, the knives I've seen at dollar stores had such huge gouges in the blade, you would spend a lot of time or need power tools to sharpen it. A couple of them also had such horrible handles that you could cut yourself on the metal protruding from the badly cast plastic handles.
You don't need to spend a lot on a knife, as you can get some cheap ones at a restaurant supplier that might not be pretty, but will be easier to sharpen and stay sharp longer. Used knives can be cheap and easy to sharpen as long as they aren't dinged up. But that is a long ways from saying the cheapest knives are good enough just because they can be sharpened.
I think your attitude in this situation is actually damaging and can potentially cause harm by pushing an unrealistic view of how rescuing animals can work. The first week or two can tell you a lot about an animal, but people need to be prepared for changes or difficulty on longer timescales. Chiding people that may have been trying very hard to do the right thing isn't helping anyone, unless the goal was to just find someone to call an idiot online for no particular reason.
Caribbean martial arts falls on a continuum between fighting style and dance, while pigeonholing it as either amounts to a severe misunderstanding. Efficiency and practicality is not necessarily the goal and can take a back seat, especially toward the dance end of the spectrum. You can criticize a training aid as being useless in a fight, but you end up looking like someone criticizing chess by saying how useless chess pieces are in a foxhole.