Don't gaslight people by just calling her "unarmed" especially when QAnon is turning her into a martyr for their movement. It's fundamentally dishonest.

I'm not one to celebrate people's death, but I will sleep a little easier tonight knowing that he now belongs in the past.

...

Cut it out with the regurgitated Fox News talking points. My college has a university funded Bible studies club, an entire religion studies department, and a rather large college conservatives political club. My advisor is literally a Deacon in the Orthodox Catholic Church and another professor in the same department used to be a protestant pastor. Nobody is coming to brainwash your children.

On huge threads with like 1k comments, I do find that the high quality ones float to the surface (having more to do with stuff like hiding vote counts and restricting down vote access IMO). However, it's not hard to find people confidently talking out of their ass making it to the top of threads with even hundreds of comments. Look for people talking about something you are an expert in (or do a brief google search on a topic somebody is claiming expertise in, especially if it is related to ideology) and it isn't hard to spot. There are even all the bad cliche comments of the other platforms even if they aren't as simple as "have an upvote my friend" or "username checks out".

I find threads on politics and culture particularly unbearable here because it's the exact same chest beating and narratives that you will find on any other platform except that the posters possess the same self-rightousness and academic tone as if they were talking about mathematical fact and not a political opinion. Even more so, it often comes without the self-awareness to know that your opinions and arguments are most often being taken from whatever social media you frequent. Everybody is a "free thinker" here even though they spout off the exact same political arguments as everybody else in their clique. It makes some threads pretty toxic IMO because of how seriously everyone takes themselves. I'm of course making general claims to which there are exceptions, but this is something I've seen.

Thinking that you need to be super-intelligent to post on or browse HN is a bad meme. Take the guy below me that thinks jokes on HN "require higher levels of intelligence to parse". It's the same mentality that part of the Rick and Morty fan base gets made fun of for.

> Toxic masculinity is a narrow and repressive description of manhood, designating manhood as defined by violence, sex, status and aggression. It’s the cultural ideal of manliness, where strength is everything while emotions are a weakness; where sex and brutality are yardsticks by which men are measured, while supposedly “feminine” traits—which can range from emotional vulnerability to simply not being hypersexual—are the means by which your status as “man” can be taken away.

It seems to be a catch all term for the problematic parts of the way men are idealized by society. IE stuff like how men can be expected to hide away their emotions or be perceived as weak. Stuff like that shows up in suicide statistics.

Part of the problem with understanding the concept, IMO, is that ideological forces have managed to sway part of the public (or at least certain echo chambers) into believing that the people talking about it really mean "all men are bad" or "traditional masculinity is bad." I think there's something real here that needs to be addressed though.

Edit: Case and point... somebody further down in this thread accused the term "toxic masculinity" of being designed by "academic Marxist feminists" who are waging culture wars in order to hyper-feminize small boys.

[1] https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-difference-b...

Does anybody else remember it? It was one of the good ones. From what I remember, the "asshole genius" trope was greatly played up for the film and he was much more human than that even with the treatment he endured.

I ended up socializing a bit with the students during optional study sessions and it was usually the people that came from more disadvantaged schools that needed to be there in order to keep up with the class. Some of them also had to take a job (or two) to manage their bills during college which meant that they didn't always have the time to be at the study sessions.

The other knob you can use to change the vibrations is the mass of the balls. This can be done by using different isotopes of the same element and the critical temperature goes down with mass.

I'm trying to find and am not having luck, but I swear that Scotty from the youtube channel Strange Parts had an excellent interview with Rigol about this.

Of course, the material studied here requires some of the highest pressures we can produce and so we can't deploy the technology. More importantly IMO is the fact that we were already expecting room temperature superconductors with this route. There is a theory of superconductivity which accurately describes these materials.

The more interesting materials are the unconventional superconductors which have a high transition temperature. From the side of physics, we still have no idea how they work other than something involving many body interactions. Plus with their rising Tc, they might be a route to practical superconductivity.

- Commander Adama

You input characters using the same notation as latex (IE \mu or \hbar) and then tab autocomplete to unicode. Even jupyter notebooks support that convention. Most people in Julia's target audience know latex already and so there is zero learning curve.

It did hugely simplify my scientific code where I already had variable names like hnu, omega_squared, and k_prime_prime which become arduous when checking against long equations.