I use Pocketbook. It opens just about anything - epub, mobi, pdf, pdb, and many more formats. Just get a book anywhere and copy it via USB. Or send it as an email attachment to your special address and it will download automatically. You can even replace the reading app with another relatively easily, if you want.
I thought these were disproved by lack of gravitational microlensing?
Why are there such high differences around Britain and pretty much nowhere else? I understand why the Mediterranean sea has almost none, such a large volume just can’t pass the Gibraltar, but I don’t understand why there is so much water moving around Britain. Is it just water moving along and being stopped by land wihnout having much other places to flow?
A solution to this problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9pD_UK6vGU
Cool. At a glance, oldest are horse riders and sometimes shooters, youngest skateboarders and some swimmers.
I relatively often meet 4 of these:
no speed limit (use the normal limit for this type of road)
car tires may defy laws of nature (slippery road, usually followed by a sign saying it applies during rain)
speed camera ahead
no water polluting goods (not very common, but occasionally comes up. There is also no dangerous materials with an orange trapezoid instead of an ellipse)
I also saw don’t drive off the pier (around ferries), watch for skiers (in the mountains with cross-country skiing routes), and warning about planes, although in different design (around airports).
So basically angles of ends of streets. Well, there are many options and we just don’t know which one it is.
Also, how is the direction assigned? Especially for streets that are not straight? For example taking a beginning and end and measuring their angle wouldn’t be very representative. And how does it work with long and short streets? Are longer more heavily represented, or do they count the same? I’d like it if it took a tangent to the street every 100 m or so, but somehow I doubt that’s what they did.
Photons have zero rest mass, right? They have mass while moving, don’t they?
Is it better than using 25 % less salt?
I am by no means highly informed, but so far, I didn’t see a few things I think should be mentioned.
Both Israel’s government and Hamas are definitely bad guys who found stirring hate towards each other a convenient way of staying in power. After all, If you have the stongest rhetoric towards someone who wants to kill people of your country, of course those people will vote for you and you can get away with things you otherwise couldn’t.
There’s also another side which I haven’t seen explicitly mentioned and should be considered: surrounding islamic countries (who are surely not a homogeneous group). They are in a good position to help palestinian civilians, but don’t do very much for various reasons I know relatively little about.
I didn’t read the original paper yet, perhaps it’s there, but it isn’t in the linked article nor its source Ars Technica article. Can authors themselves upload their papers to these archives, and if so, how to do it correctly to make it findable both by DOI and other means? Does anyone know?
There were some compatibility problems that required genetic engineering of the pig. I don’t remember specifics, but there was talk about potential dormant viruses in pig DNA that need to be removed first, possible problems with glycolsylation (sugar chains on the proteins outside of cells) and maybe more. The article also mentions that the pig had some human genes, I’m sure those help compatibility too. So many changes would be next to impossible to do until relatively recently, before use of CRISPR-Cas9. Also, it must’ve taken some time to certify the procedure. That’s why it took so much time since the topic was hot.
Wow, thank you, this is a great source! So less than 90% of the income is used to run the companies and do all the R&D. Honestly, that’s less than I thought and shows how greedy they are. If I read it right, they are more profitable than other large companies. Wow. So a state-owned non-profit pharma company could in theory produce new medicine 10 % cheaper and still be fine. Provided that state-owned company could be as efficient as a private one…
You don’t need profit in the sense of making lots of extra money compared to how much money you actually put in. I would be very interested in how much net profit is compared to gross in relative numbers. It’s a lot in absolute numbers, but I suspect not so much in relative. The problem why drug development is so very expensive is that you don’t just pay large sums for the drugs that are developed, but also for all those that are not, because they prove not useful during the testing. And there is way, way more than the successful ones, perhaps 100 to 1? I don’t have numers at hand. So in the end, you have to charge a lot of extra money above the production cost if you want to have enough money to develop any drugs at all.
Of course, that isn’t true for old drugs. Which is a reason why generics are so much cheaper. And also why patents need to exist.
I’m sure pharma companies abuse the system as much as they can, but not as much as it might appear at a first glance.
A state doesn’t have this kind of money to burn. If they did it, the money would have to come from somewhere. So either you increase taxes, decrease spending elsewhere, or start a business making a lot of money. Such as, say, selling the newly developed medications at a markup… It’s sad, but I’m not aware of a better way.
That being said, the cost of medications in the US is utterly ridiculous.
Bigfoot. He can never get a good picture, that’s why he looks a little different. Ghost is clear, I think.
Floppy discs are like Jesus. They died to become the icon of saving.
The reason for the 50 years of oil, as I heard it explained, is that this is how far ahead the oil companies plan. They look for enough oil to cover the timeframe they plan for. When they have that covered, they don’t look, until they need more. When they need more, they go and find it.