Good bit of survivor bias in the retired population. If you can put in 30-40 years of full time work and then afford to retire you probably don't have a propensity for substance abuse.
It's not really clear they can pinpoint any actual discrimination, just that this platform isn't statistically recommending certain ethnic groups at the same rate as distributed interviews. though seems there could be tons of conflating factors there.
though I did turn up this from the paper
>pymetrics. pymetrics builds 16 online games to measure applicants’ cognitive traits, including propensity to
take risks, processing speed, trust, altruism, and planning ability. For each client, pymetrics trains a binary
classifier: positive training examples correspond to the gameplay features of at least 50 current employees in that
role and negative training examples correspond to the gameplay features of random profiles in the pymetrics
database [46].4 Choosing which employees will serve as the positive examples is the primary way that the
employer influences the classifier
Seems possible that this could create bias towards the existing ethic makeup of a position. if the existing employees are predominantly white males the games may subtly bias against any out-group
> China also banned the domestic use of Paraquat in 2017;
> Paraquat is widely used as a suicide agent in developing countries because it is widely available at low cost. Further, the toxic dose is low (10 mL or 2 teaspoons is enough to kill).
Someday (assuming humanity makes it that long) people will look back on this era the way we look back on the Romans and their lead pipes.
You experience more than 100% of all of these costs as a renter, while you have none of the up-front costs and less liability you also have no agency and no equity. It can be a trap though, as selling isn't free and if you didn't have enough equity built up you can end up losing money to move. Some housing ends up as rentals because of this, makes more sense to not sell and to rent it.
Renting is definitely the better option for certain people, if you intend to move often, or want to live in an apartment your overall costs are likely to be lower. If you want a single-family home and don't want to move often (or be moved out) Buying is worth it. Even setting aside the satisfaction of home ownership if you can mange to pay off your property you pretty much can't live cheaper at the same scale.
that said I've rented, I've owned, and I've been a landlord and I'd take home ownership in a heartbeat. It's not all rosy, and being responsible for maintenance is no joke but not being subject to the affairs or whimsy of someone else's finances along with the pride and sense of actual ownership is is wonderful.
I don't play any IRL magic but I know it can be hard to "fix" and maybe isn't broken. Casually those rules would probably be good house rules to balance play, though even small changes like this could change balance and lean all decks towards exploiting the rule
And that has an additional mana cost to balance it (though it does have additional bonus). So you could kinda say "everyone gets trade-routes already in play" but like any "free card" fix does it simply skew deckbuilding into a new "broken" ?
> does it simply skew deckbuilding into a new "broken"
exactly, that's why it probably isn't feasible other than casual/social play: there's no change to the fundamental rules that doesn't end up warping the meta-game. (Particularly if the fix relates to mitigating mana flood/screw with consistency: I suspect it rewards combo lists, whose win-cons are indistinguishable from "find three specific cards".)
As a lefty I never had any problems adapting to a right hand mouse and actually find the keyboard to be better suited as a "left hand" activity and would have a hard time switching it up.
I'm a lefty, but always mouse on my right (keyboard left). This has made me exceptionally good at using hotkeys, to the point where a friend at a LAN party called me a hot-key whore. He wasn't (and still isn't) wrong. After using any program for a while, I will figure them out, including how many times to press tab to get to a field.
Living with laptops with touchpads for a couple of decades as a righty, I can use a touchpad perfectly fine with either hand, but a mouse is still right handed for me.
The animation is great though I don't understand how the collapsed singlet can exist in proximity to the superimposed ones. I would expect the presence of the defined spin to create an "observation" of a neighbor and immediately collapse the entire material.
At a quick glance, I did not see the term "collapsed" in wiki. It isn't a collapse. (The concept is still relevant[0]!)
What was drawn like a "defined spin" for pedagogy should only have been coloured different. The lone spins are always part of a longer-range quantum superposition, maybe better represented as blue blobs. The lowest "excitations" are (superpositions of) triplets, for example.
Btw I put quotes around excitations because you touched on a mysterious aspect of these systems called the "spin gap". TFA mentions it. They don't even know whether this spin gap exists! Indeed, the term "liquid" means there might not be a spin gap. (It'd be best to colour the singlet blobs orange-red and the triplet blobs red-orange)
[0] In your parlance, a "collapse" literally means dropping to a macroscopic ground state across a gap, but a liquid is already "arbitrarily" close to the ground state. "Collapsing into defined spins" will take the system _out_ of the ground state, so it can't happen spontaneously... Or so it's believed..
Admittedly I didn't go over the whole article just watched the video. around the 90 second mark they mention that the spin sate can drop into a superposition called a spin singlet.
then they show heating the material to break a spin singlet and demonstrate the broken singlet atoms moving around the liquid (~2:00 mark). I'm referring to that breaking as a "collapse"
I would expect that a singlet in superposition could not coexist with an adjacent "non-collapsed" atom because it's defined magnetic field would need to interact with it's neighbors breaking the superposition.
The animation is a good intro but takes many liberties.
It is more accurate to think of the spins as always interacting with one another.. at 0K temperature only singlets are allowed, increasing the temperature by just a bit, both singlets and triplets coexist, etc. even that is just a picture.
To start with an everyday analogy. if you know you have 51cents in your piggy bank, but not what the precise breakdown is. Then you must have at least one penny. But you don't know exactly how many pennies you have unless you take a look.
Unlike pennies though, the singlets and triplets cannot be distinguished from one another. One can only measure how many "excess" triplets there are, one cannot point to where these triplets are hiding. The measurement doesn't "cause" a collapse, after the measurement, you know there is some spin imbalance but it is still in some superposition
Anyways.. to fully get what I am going with this, you will have to play with the math on your own. I have, but it's hard to translate all that to English. I'm just trying to point out that the interesting part is not in "collapse" but rather the "failure to collapse"--- the failure to take the system out of superpositions. Because the spins are always interacting.
Or maybe I just don't understand enough to explain it like Feynman.. heh.. but if you turn some of what Feynman has said in plain English into math, you would see that some of his stuff is also.. misleading
IBM must have some sims you can run on your PC, ask ChatGPT to solve and draw a small "Heisenberg model" that imports their libs. If you can take Taiwanese:
seems like a good move. If the lame rebranding, platform enshittificaiton, or Musk's dubious political alignment and all around repulsiveness didn't turn them off yet, and they're actually posting that much that's pretty much a captive audience. Might as well squeeze some cash outta them.
reply