Yeah, as far as I know, the real origin of the term is for shooting targets (or people), so you are literally double tapping the trigger. That way, if the first round doesn’t hit (or doesn’t kill), the second will.

The uncertainty piece is key, though. If they fired a missile and werent sure if it hit by the time they launched the second, they could accurately call that a double-tap. That’s what hegseth seems to be trying to push, especially with his reference to “fog of war”.

The moment you know the first shot destroyed the target, it ceases to be a double-tap.

I just don’t like how they are trying to absolve themselves through language they know will be misinterpreted, and then the media just parrots it with no issue.

P.s., to be clear, whether it is a double tap doesn’t change much to me because the first missile was already a war crime.

Even articles condemning this attack refer to it as a “double-tap” strike, which is really misleading because that insinuates quick succession. An attack followed by a separate attack an hour later is not a double-tap

I mean, they should be the ones funding this stuff all the time (it should just be involuntary on their part)

It looks like the EU’s limit for supplements is 3 mg/kg.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/915/oj/eng

Consumer reports “level of concern” is ug/day. They tested Huel at 6.3 ug per 90 g serving, or 70 ug/kg (.07 mg/kg).

Basically Huel only hits 2.3% of the EU limits. It looks like the EU regulates “supplements” assuming they are like pills or something where you’d only consume a few grams a day. Compare it to salt, with a limit of 1 mg/kg. Something that you’d actually be expected to eat a lot of, like grain, has a limit of 0.2 mg/kg. Basically, it’s still below the limit there, but getting close.

The US limit for grain is .02 mg/kg, so 10x more strict than the EU. I’m not sure about supplements, though.

Huel is a company founded in the EU (now brexited), but as a meal replacement, my guess is the formula is the same everywhere.

It sounds like the ingredients come from all over the world, so it’s probably a roll of the dice whether whatever lot you end up with contains material grown in soil with too high of a lead content.

They literally did that with Facebook. Yeah, plenty of people left, but it worked.

There is no general “antifa”, but there are many individual (often regional) organizations with some form of “anti-fascist” or “antifa” in the name, like “rose city antifa”.

In addition, there are many organizations that are not specifically antifascist, but would describe an opposition to fascism as part of their core beliefs. This includes a lot of media organizations.

Lastly, anyone with political views that do not support fascism are automatically anti-fascist.

The goal is to oppress all 3 categories of people.

Im definitely not a lawyer, but here is a government link.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-visit/visitor.html

Permitted activities under b1 include

• Consult with business associates
• Attend a scientific, educational, professional, or business convention or conference
• Settle an estate
• Negotiate a contract

Not permitted include:

• Study
• Employment
• Paid performances, or any professional performance before a paying audience
• Arrival as a crewmember on a ship or aircraft
• Work as foreign press, in radio, film, print journalism, or other information media
• Permanent residence in the United States

Also on that official site, it says the permitted activities for visa-free (ESTA) are the same as B visas.

If someone is employed outside the US and comes to the US on behalf of their employer, and not paid for their services by any US entity, then it doesn’t matter what they do, as long as they leave when they are supposed to.

The US government actually doesn’t care who is paying for the work, what matters is if the work is taking place within the US, it requires a proper visa (or esta).

I auto-translated the Korean article on this because it has more detail.

https://n.news.naver.com/article/015/0005180971?sid=101

Sounds like the majority of people picked up were in fact Korean citizens working under false pretenses. They used b1 visas and ESTA (non-visa travel authorization) meant for things like personal travel or international meetings, but not productive work like constructing a new facility.

The fact that they were Korean insinuates that they weren’t doing run-of-the-mill construction tasks because that could be handled by local firms (who would probably be hiring local Latino workers): they were probably there for much more technical work.

Hyundai would have known this, and would have been intentionally breaking this law. This sounds to me a lot more like a big company actually getting consequences than what ice has been doing raiding small businesses and home depot parking lots.

I think the main thing that’s happening is analogous to what’s happened with a lot of electronics over the past couple of decades. It seems like every electronic device runs off of a way more powerful computer than is necessary because it’s easier/cheaper to buy a million little computers and do a little programming than it is to have someone design a bespoke circuit, even if the bespoke circuits would be more resource efficient, robust, and repairable. Our dishwashers don’t need wifi, but if you are running them off a single board computer with wifi built in, why wouldn’t you figure out a way to advertise it?

Similarly, you have all sorts of tasks that can be done with way more computational efficiency (and trust and tweakability) if you have the know-how to set something bespoke up, but it’s easier to throw everything at an overpowered black box and call it a day.

The difference is that manufacturing costs for tiny computers can come down to be cheaper in price relative to a bespoke circuit, but anything that decreases the cost of computing will apply equally to an LLM and a less complex model. I just hope industry/government pushing isn’t enough to overcome what the “free market” should do. After all, car centric design (suburbia, etc) is way less efficient than train centric, but we still went there.

My work would be improved by the dumbest of dumb retrieval augmented models: a monkey with a thesaurus, ctrl+f, and a pile of my documents. Unfortunately, the best they can offer is a service where I send my personal documents into the ether and a new wetland is dried in my honor (or insert your ecological disaster metaphor of choice).

If there is a demand for a forensic capability, there’s someone willing to sell it to a police department (and a jury).

Basically an allied country having a base in your country means that any attacker would presumably also have to attack your ally, drawimg them into the conflict. Obviously agreements like NATO article 5 can do that, but people can back out of agreements. Physical presence is more binding than paper.

Southern baptists were pro-choice until the rise of the “moral majority” required southern baptists to fall in line with the catholic church on abortion to create the supply side Jesus we know today.

It’s such an easy thing to predict happening, too. If you did it perfectly, it would, at best, maintain an unstable equilibrium and just keep the same output quality.

I found this good review article based on a study commissioned by the Canadian government.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408444.2023.2295338

It seems like potential IQ effects are still difficult to distinguish as a dose response, so they weren’t able to come up with a point of departure. It doesn’t help that in a lot of studies comparing “high” and “low” fluoridation effects on IQ, the “low” is still higher than the WHO recommended level of 1.5 mg/L, and the US recommended level of 0.75.

I think the optimal level is likely going to vary by municipality based on the quality of dental care and the use of fluoridated toothpaste (that everyone overuses), and consumption of high fluoride beverages like tea. I guess my main takeaway is that people need to read their local water quality report, and do what they will with that information

Do not obey in advance. The only way fascists succeed is by people chosing to appease them.

The UK largely doesn’t fluoridate, so this is one of the (few) areas where the US actually does better than the UK. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_by_country

The UK does generally have better tooth health in the grand scheme of things, but it’s actually pretty close, and the US is still really high on the list.

https://www.yongeeglintondental.com/blog/healthy-primary-teeth/

Without checking, I suspect the US’s slightly higher cavity rate is more down to sugar consumption than received dental care.

It basically says you can’t add anything to water except for “water quality additives” and has a fuzzy definitely of water quality additive.

403.859 Prohibited acts.—The following acts and the causing thereof are prohibited and are violations of this act: (8) The use of any additive in a public water system whichdoes not meet the definition of a water quality additive as defined in s. 403.852(19)

And then 403.852(19) has

“Water quality additive” means any chemical, additive, or substance that is used in a public water system for the purpose of: (a) Meeting or surpassing primary or secondary drinking water standards; (b) Preventing, reducing, or removing contaminants; or © Improving water quality.

Bold are the additions. The “primary and secondary drinking water standards” are legally defined terms where the EPA sets limits on maximum allowable amounts of stuff in water.

https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/how-epa-regulates-drinking-water-contaminants-documents

Personally, I would argue that fluoride is added to water for the purpose of “improving water quality” because water that protects people’s teeth is higher quality than water that doesn’t. If I were someone from a municipality whose job was ensuring water quality, I would read this as still allowing the addition of fluoride. If anyone doesn’t like that, let them try to prove in a court that fluoridated water is lower quality.

I just do not know what to think about outfits like this. On the one hand, it’s hilarious that they are using the exact same compound that is released by fossil fuel companies, so any attempts to regulate its release will effect fossil fuel burners more than them. Some states have already banned the intentional release of anything designed for positive effects on the climate, though (i think Tennessee was the first).

On the other hand, the carbon credit economy is largely a sham and a fake fix for our woes, and only really serves to facilitate companies to wash their hands of environmental impacts. Solar geoengineering introduced to this system is destined for failure as well, I believe. We may need to resort to solar geoengineering to preserve what we can of our world, but it will have to be through international cooperation and study combined with reduction of carbon pollution, not by two dudes in a fly-by-night operation releasing balloons.

The district as a whole voted republican, but the attendees are just whoever showed up to the town hall to air grievances, which sounds like it was not republicans.