People advocating for teaching of personal finance and taxes in schools were always the ones not paying attention.

I know this because I’ve seen them say that, I’ve also seen them not pay attention when the topic was addressed when they were in high school. Many of these topics are mandatory in Scottish High schools and have been for most millennials and younger.

Anyone that can comprehend the most basic algebra and statistics a secondary education would give you can understand taxes and finance from free accessible websites/library books. Best practices for personal finance and tax laws may change, so your likely to have to learn some of it again. It’s vital schools provide the more abstract but timeless skills of maths, reasoning, reading and comprehension.

In Australia they’re all manufactured in China. So it’s a Chinese car.

Cars in high developed economies like Australia have until recently been mainly manufactured in highly developed economies like EU, Japan, US etc.

So manufactured in China like the article says.

Where were they manufactured?

I didnt bother reading the second since the first was blatantly misleading.

The second looks like they’re trying to p hack hack their way to a result.

They also have more relapses in the curicumin group in the second 6 month period than the control group. They also have enough people leaving the control group to cause a shift in their p value to make their results insignificant.

The second papers findings are weak and they aren’t very robust.

The evidence is much better for SSRI, and it isn’t great, but the referred paper even points out that the curriculum wasn’t as effective as an SSRI.

The meme remains true, no proper or valid studies exist. The existence of a paper doesn’t prove that, the paper is self addresses it wasn’t a proper study. They just did it in a dishonest way.

This study is absolutely terrible.

The study found no differences in the first four weeks. More than 10% dropped out during the study. The study was too small a sample to draw any serious conclusions from. The conclusions they did draw from were a subsample of people they declared treatment resistant. They even say in the paper their isn’t enough data to suggest their was any benefit, just not forcefully enough. Just enough to make low information readers think the study was successful.

This study was done in response to two other studies. One which showed no benefit another that suggested a benefit, but the study lacked a control group. So no meaningful conclusion could be drawn.

Finally the researchers were funded by ‘health supplement’ groups.

Nintendo’s one of the few game businesses you can be confident that their E content is okay for children. Many other businesses are using in game advertising, inappropriate content and predatory gambling in game purchases.

So it’s of great value to Nintendo to control their content and IP. Because the impression of children and parents are important to them.

Because children are exposed and familiar with Nintendo IP other people can (deliberately or not) use it to influence them. These children are unlikely to understand this is parody or see the irony in it.

They weren’t people or organisations they could sue.

If Sony said the new Nintendo system playstation, Nintendo would lose trademark rights over this. Because a large business like valve is involved they can sue and are compelled to sue to retain their trademark.

The emulator that recently got taken down was because an organisation was developing and distributing it. Individuals that copy and share the source code themselves won’t get any threats from Nintendo because they don’t need to find and sue them. Nintendo had to sue these other businesses, to retain their trademark.

You also lose the trademarks you don’t defend. If Nintendo was found to knowingly not pursue those that infringe in their trademarks then they a court could allow someone else to use that trademark.

The articles published to the journal. That’s where the peer review happens. The university will then host a copy of the published paper with open access. The university doesn’t peer review this, it just provides the hosting. Often the motivation for doing this is compliance with open access. Many areas have well regarded journals that authors want to publish in that are closed, but the research is funded on the condition of open access.

These papers hosted by the university may have different formatting, but will have the same content. They are often harder to find as the references will be to the same paper published in the journal. Some paper search engines will include links to the university’s free access page, but you often have to search separately on a general purpose search engine to find that copy.

I did this once. They wouldn’t give me a copy, I didn’t push it because they were retired and did try to give me advice about contacting librarians to add the journal to their subscription.

I do imagine younger people publishing more recent work would be more open to sharing their work.

For anyone else seeing this the university of the author often also publishes their papers free access. Even when the journal the paper is published in is paywalled. So it’s worth checking that. This is especially the case if the work was funded by bodies that require open access.

It should be the 2013 borders. Before the invasion of Crimea. Russia agreed not to invade Ukraine, in exchange for Ukraine giving Russia it’s nuclear weapons. If Russia doesn’t give everything back, then it can’t be trusted to make any deal with any nation. Including peace deals.

Any agreement needs Ukraine to get all it’s territory back, and allow them to join NATO. Russia can’t be trusted. But they won’t challenge NATO directly. Europe also needs to take defence more seriously. Only eastern Europe is really taking the Russian threat seriously. Western Europe was fooled into thinking they won the cold war. Russia and China never saw it as over.

They don’t have an infinite supply of radar installations.

They are only just able to detect the aircraft at the end of its life.

The US can produce more f35s than china can produce radar installations. This aircraft is still in mass production, with many more being built and sold to many nations. Which likely can’t be detected. If they could then that would be in the announcement.

It’s a bigger deal to detect the newer and more widely available aircraft that can be launched from aircraft carriers. The F22 is an interceptor, primarily for defense. So it’s less likely to be used where multiple hostile radar installations are in range.

Sounds like the solution to overcome this is to send two F22s. All their radars will be focusing on the first one it’ll be easier for the second to go by undetected.

But there so much more data they could also be collecting. Think of the poor multi billion international company.

Protestants came about at the same time printing and reading became more common. People came to understand the bible better. They found that their local priest or Catholic church wasn’t representing the bible very well. Some priests couldn’t read and were just making it up.

Catholics practice many things that go against the teachings in the bible. They worships false profits (saints, Mary, popes, etc). They practice religion with lots of ceremony and publicity. They also acted as gatekeepers to God, despite Jesus talking about having a personal relationship with God.

The Catholic church was caught out and many people were unhappy with it. So they left it in protest. Hence protestant being used to describe these new enlightenment era Christians.

A protestant would not think that leaving the Catholic church is abandoning God. They would have to see it as the right path to follow God. It’s not consistent for a protestant to say they follow the teachings of Christ and the Catholic church is Christian. Any protestant saying Catholics are Christian hasn’t put a great deal of thought into it. However, it would be appropriate for someone studying, categorising or discussing religions to call both Catholics and Protestant’s Christians.

There is also a long history of discrimination between Catholics and Protestants. Protestants country’s retained more of their own wealth and political decision making. Protestantism was more successful in places where literacy was higher. Both these factors lead to protestant countries being wealthier, more prosperous and lead to earlier and more successful industrialisation. This created the situation that many people were immigrants from Catholic countries to protestant ones. Like today, they faced discrimination. The religious difference of the incoming immigrants heightened the conflict. This also made it easier for people in both religions to see it as separate and different.

I imagine a ground based crew would be available to intervene and fly it remotely. With an option for the powered aircraft crew to fly it remotely through a data link in the cable.

Proper sensory redundancy, appropriate control systems and designing for inherent stability should make this very safe.

The problem with the recent Boeing aircraft is modifying the airframe to take larger quieter engineers caused it to be inherently unstable. This type of aircraft should be designed to be inherently stable. However, redesign is expensive so they avoided that. Instead they added a control system to stabilise the aircraft (perfectly acceptable). The problem is they didn’t add redundancy to the sensors the control system relied on, faulty data caused the aircraft to crash. They also skipped training the pilots on how to override this new control system.

All completely avoidable if everything was done right. They got away with not doing everything right because they successfully corrupted the FDA. Other equivalent bodies assumed the FDA wasn’t corrupt and accepted their qualification of the aircraft.

Remove the corruption and penny punching this concept is completely safe. With corruption all aircrafts are liable to be dangerous.

If you don’t like MATLAB your probably not the correct audience. It’s for people needing to do data analysis, simulation or control and have a lot of money to pay for the libraries. The things software developers hate about it tend to be what makes it better for statistics and modelling. Math works even suggest it isn’t appropriate for making software as the sell simulink coder that turns simulink models into c++ code.

Once your over the hump, it’s a pleasure to use relative to word. Especially if your document gets large or has lots of maths in it.