This only works if society was okay with surveillance on private property. The wealthy can afford large tracts of private land and can afford to send people on their behalf to interact in public for many things. They can pay services to come to them as well.
If the wealthy want to hide away in a prison of their own choice I’m ok with that. What I don’t like are the wealthy using their wealth to take over public spaces. Like using Venice for a private wedding.
The "wealthy" can't control the FAA or obtain TFRs (look no further than the issues Elon and Taylor Swift have had with obfuscating their jet registration), so they're basically fucked when it comes to preventing aerial video observation over private property unless this "large tract of private land" exists within 14nm of Washington D.C. (these types of tracts aren't practically obtainable there) or falls within an existing flight-restricted zone (which aren't typically permanent.)
I can reproduce this by covering one of the exterior mics used for ANC when there is a decent amount of background noise in the environment. It results in feedback that causes a high pitch ringing.
The AirPods Pro 2 don’t have this same issue. I can’t reproduce the same behavior regardless of how I cover the exterior on the pro 2s.
Causal profiling is something I infrequently use but I have been able to apply it outside of micro benchmarks in an orchestration system.
If you have a business process that is complex and owned by many different groups then causal profiling can be a good tool for dealing with the complexity. For large workflows in particular this can be powerful as the orchestration owner can experiment without much coordination (other than making sure the groups know/agree that some processing might be delayed).
Surely you’re not trying to draw some conclusion between an entire countries modern day medical field and a theory a person proposed in the 1800s, right?
Hi, not the parent poster here. I believe the argument being made is that diagnostic criteria, and diagnoses themselves, can be shaped by cultural norms. As the Overton window shifts, so do the thoughts and behaviors that we deem pathological.
> Surely you’re not trying to draw some conclusion between an entire countries modern day medical field and a theory a person proposed in the 1800s, right?
That would depend on whether anything has changed since the 1800s. But that's very clearly not so -- consider that recovered memory therapy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy), based on as much science as drapetomania, was practiced in the 1990s, and still has adherents today.
Also, for human psychology to be regarded as a medical field, it would have to be based in science. But human psychology studies the mind, therefore by definition it's not based in science.
I don’t know if I buy that this is a conspiracy with bribes but killing the grants reduces the rate of growth of energy generation which reduces its future supply.
Adding energy capacity reduces the prices at which firms can sell energy since there would be more supply. Removing the grants means that existing energy generation firms need to worry less about how increased supply would harm their prices.
reply