>The team found nearly identical performance for the torpedo and standard bats except that the sweet spot for the torpedo bat was a half inch farther from the bat tip than the standard bat.

>“It was actually pretty phenomenal how close they were,” said Smith.

>For some players who like to hit the ball closer in, the torpedo bat might be a better option for them

some players with some batting characteristics may find this better? is that what you are referring to? What part of the article disputes this at all, let alone concludes the opposite? Is it the researcher's own quote? I really don't understand your objection here. It seems to be based on your own intuition about how players "generally" hit balls. But the researchers themselves have presented their own data and conclusions pretty clearly here.

not really ignored when it's in the article. the researchers themselves are quoted saying the results are incredibly close.

I don't have a final answer for all situations, but certainly if you look at those things on the map right now they read one name, then the other in parentheses. The "Gulf of America" has no such parenthetical. That seems like an acceptable compromise that Google has already adopted in other disputes. I suspect it will rile the current administration, however, if they do so here, and so they have not.

edit: oh, I find Google has already addressed this, and it is only in the US that it is just gulf of america:

https://blog.google/products/maps/united-states-geographic-n...

ah well.

“Any reference to the ‘Gulf of America’ initiative on your Google Maps platform must be exclusively limited to the marine area under US jurisdiction,” the letter read. “Any extension beyond that zone exceeds the authority of any national government or private entity..."

So the issue is not the renaming per se, but that waters previously known collectively among all countries bordering it as the Gulf of Mexico have been wholly renamed.

The argument seems sound: America has no authority over waters beyond its territories, and its territories end some miles off the US coast. Beyond that border it is only logical for a company to refer to a body of water by the name more commonly accepted internationally.

But anyone who thinks it's new should go back and read the first part of The Anatomy of Melancholy; there, a fictionalized Democritus, accused of insanity, turns the accusation back on the world at large, citing a surprisingly large and still relevant list of issues: information overload, self-serving politicians, charlatans, rubes, general bullshit. The phenomenon of meteoria goes back that far and further. I'm actually curious whether Carr cites Burton!

https://techcrunch.com/2024/12/03/why-does-the-name-david-ma...

We switched out plastic containers for glass and silicone for the most part some time back. Personally I was just routinely disappointed with the quality of the tupperware-type things, so why not spent a few bucks more once and get something that lasts? It still will have a plastic top or parts but you can at least heat it up in the glass part.

Fish are aggregators of this stuff so that's not surprising. Spam and other processed meats and prepared foods also not too surprising (though what's with the Annie's organic mac and cheese being so full of it? Maybe it's the sauce?)... I think the tap water was the scariest one to me. Sure, you expect some but ... wildly unsafe levels?!

https://sherwood.news/tech/what-companys-past-reveals-the-fu...