If we're going to parrot outdated legislation, let's also force all automobiles to be classified as horses & carriages, so they can be taxed in accordance to the carriage act of 1794.
I often wonder if it's in the best interest of humans to exterminate bats. Seems like it's only a matter of time until the next horrendous virus, created by bats, wreaks havoc.
> Maybe exterminating fruit-eating bats wouldn't be as bad
Maybe not as bad but still bad because they are pollinators and spread seeds. The article says:
> Bats provide many beneficial ecosystem services. Some bats play important roles such as plant pollination and seed dispersal. Bats can pollinate more than 500 species of plants including avocados, bananas, dates and mangoes.
> In Southeast Asia, durian, a highly valued crop, can be effectively pollinated only by the Dawn Bat. In this sense, bats are important economically for people. Some bats can also play critical roles in spreading seeds and regrowing forests.
Yeah that'll probably turn out as well as when the Chinese tried to kill off the sparrows leading to huge insect swarms. (Also Bats are also pollinators that you would've noticed if you'd read the article).
It's because 98% of the people on here haven't actually used DeFi. The most they've done is bought and sold a little btc or eth on coinbase. The ah-ha moments come from real use.
I've paid tuition twice abroad. Once it took days, multiple forex/bank accounts, and had several annoying surprise fees. The second was in BTC and was settled in five minutes, directly.
It's been said before but the experience is a lot like writing an email versus a letter.
Partially agree with this. It is not uncommon for a virus to sneak into the brain or other organs, but SARS COV2 is a little different in that it specifically attacks receptors found in all those areas. It isn't just a bi-product of the virus overwhelming your immune system and being so prevalent it gets into everything.
I do wish these articles would talk more about what the virus is doing (less scary) than what it can do (article can be written to be as terrifying as the author wants). If .0000001 of cases have their hearts attacked it isn't as fear mongery as saying "look it can attack your heart!"
There's just not much of an article to write about what the virus generally does. They lay out the typical course over two paragraphs near the beginning of the article: it infects the lungs, and gives patients a progressively harder time breathing, until either their immune system fights it back or their breathing is too impaired.
It's a question of scale, and balance. Yes, I think it is ridiculous to ask for donations to keep unwanted dogs alive when there are people on the same island who are suffering.
There are many bad things happening everywhere. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try and stack-rank them, in order to allocate funds effectively. There's diminishing returns to everything[0]. As you throw money at problem #1, it becomes more and more expensive to make a marginal improvement, so eventually, it swaps places with some other problem in the ranking.
There are many criteria you could use for making such ranking of problems (a popular one is minimizing dollars per lives saved, or dollars per QALY added). Living in a free society means people are free to decide how much (if anything all) they want to spend on charitable causes, and on which ones. But in one's individual spending, it's worth to think about how to get maximum "bang for your buck", in terms of alleviating suffering.
Six months ago the shelter didn't need money because people had money and donated it willingly. Now the people around there are starving and can't waste money keeping random strays alive when their own children are starving.
And the people running this shelter, knowing that donor funds are limited, are asking for it to be spent on keeping unwanted dogs alive when there are people starving. It's more humane to put the dogs to sleep. They will feel no pain.
But nobody is going to even begin to consider putting the children to sleep are they? Those kids are going to suffer badly, and you're here arguing that the dogs are more important?
These are unprecedented times, and you can't just waste money.
Normal body temperature was defined† in Celsius, at 37ºC; this explains the decimal when used in Fahrenheit (98.6F). So even that argument of convenience doesn't hold.
† Yes everyone's baseline temperature is slightly different, but that just makes the decimal on the Fahrenheit scale look even sillier. And fever definitions are also keyed off of Celsius: 37º to 38º is "low grade". Sure, it's an arbitrary convention but it's the one adopted around the world, including in the US (98.6 to 100.4).
Absolutely. Those of us outside the US have terrible trouble with temperatures. We're constantly confused. Just the other day I was trying to measure something to a tenthousandth of a degree and I said to my friend "I wish we used Fahrenheit — they only have integer temperatures".
Thank you for bringing some basic logic back to the table.
People love to imagine that odd phenomenon have simple solutions. This whole "tether was the sole cause of the bitcoin bubble" theory is completely ridiculous.
Go into a random bar in December of 2017 and you would hear people talking about btc and altcoins...
Along with our artist platform, Dot Press: https://www.level.press/ (same developer, me :)