Out of curiosity, would you end up with the same resultant amount of water before and after hydrolysis? I’m aware some energy would be lost, but would hydrolysis actually decrease the amount of water? (sorry if this a dumb question, but I haven’t actually seen it explicitly answered before)
That if you know how to code, you understand how computers work and understand really complicated math concepts.
Yay, now we can use electrolysis on sea water to recombine and create fresh water easier!
I mean, they often do. But if the rents too damn high and you don’t get paid enough, there isn’t much that knowing how to budget is going to help with.
I was gonna recommend a newer mazda (newer than 2014) as it is often best for the money from what I’ve seen lately, but if you are in the subcompact market, Crosstreks are pretty hard to beat. Been reviewing the market as well to maybe get a newer car in a year or so I’ve looked a reviews on a lot of drivetrains. I’ve heard of some issues with older crosstreks (mostly just issues with oil consumption, and some CVT fears), although if you are getting new/very slightly used they probably would be great choice (probably better with the 2.5l engine). I am a bit biased as my mother used to have a outback with an EJ engine (those would reliably blow a headgasket, or two in her case), which probably has tarnished my view of boxer engines for long term reliability, which is why I generally don’t recommend them.
Even if they got an immobilizer, people might still try to break into them given their reputation for being easily stolen. At the very least, they’d have to worry about broken windows and messed up steering column stuff. It’s probably a decent idea to sell and move on if they can afford to, although I’d personally go with another brand than Subaru.
While I’m all for descheduling psilocybin (and decriminalizing it as well), it should be noted that this was a very small sample size study (15 people) and I’ve heard anecdotal warnings to not take shrooms if bipolar or schizophrenic for years, as there might be a slight risk of psychosis.
A bit of a dark shower thought, but wouldn’t this whole terrible situation really, really benefit China who has a larger male to female population as a whole?
Nah, he wasn’t actually flying. He was however on route to fly, which was worrying.
My somewhat cynical view is that the airlines are trying to aim for damage control as much as possible, and are tying to throw red herirngs to divert from failings on the airlines part. In this case, shrooms. If the airlines get looked at, I suspect the whole fact that he was probably that sleep deprived and it wasn’t seen as not normal could lead to actual action against airlines.
Nah, shrooms only last around 5-7hrs. In the worst case scenario, assume 8hrs so he was most assuredly not tripping. Probably sleep deprivation.
Supposedly, he took the mushies around 48hrs before, so they were out of his system. So it was probably just extreme sleep deprevation. Which begs the question, it that just considered normal on airlines?
While not it’s not mentioned in this article, he actually said he took mushrooms around 48 hrs before getting onto the plane, which would mean his trip was definitely over. He said he thought he was dreaming, which would probably be better attributed to the fact he hadn’t slept in around 40hrs. I suspect this is a case of “the mushies did it!” being reported over questions of "how was someone in that bad of mental shape was in the cockpit of a plane? " being asked.
I’d normally agree, but the sheer necessity of desalination in the next couple of decades might actually make a dent in this issue, as the downstream effects might actually affect some profit margins. The real issue is scaling, as most of the “revolutionary” desalination headlines are generally only slightly more efficient, but often have issues staying operational for long periods of time. This might have a bit of an edge on those (being completely passive, and already trying to work on the issue of salt buildup clogging the system), but I got the feeling from reading the article that they hadn’t figured out whether or not they could scale it beyond (essentially) a basic water collection service for very small communities, at least not yet.
In the US, a parallel would be evangelicals. For reference, a lot of them are republicans because their values somewhat align (anti-abortion for instance is a pretty big evangelist topic, same with banning talk/rights of lgbtq in public spaces) and they are having more of an effect on politics over the last few years. Also, they rather like book burning as well, excepting the Bible.
Especially strikes that were desperately needed.
It pretty obviously was, which is why the case was so obviously a slam dunk. Basically, she stood up for the employee who called the police (essentially Starbucks’ policy at the time when people wouldn’t leave the establishment after being asked first), and got fired in turn as Starbucks was trying to clean house on the whole thing and not get called racist. She definitely had a case.
Nah, it doesn’t have ads. It’s prime, they already have trouble getting people to watch their stuff.
I think a lot of the issue is that softbank had the idea of if they can invest a bit and get a good amount of growth, how about they invest a ton more from the outset and “guarentee” insane growth. They did that with a few startups and it worked, then they did it with WeWork and it spectacularly backfired. The basic premise of WeWork was pretty sound until the real estate market started going up in price, which kind of blew up the margins that WeWork lived in. That and a frankly financially crazy CEO kind of ruined it.
OK, thanks for the answer, it been bugging me for a bit and I couldn’t definitively answer it. I’ve heard the argument that something hydrolysis would result in fresh water being decreased, good to know my first feeling (that that argument was bs) is true.