Active hives have increased because beekeepers have reacted to the increase in bee die-offs by splitting hives and otherwise increasing the number of hives they have. This causes an increase in demand for queens, and companies that sell queens will have more hives in order to meet that demand. Also, simple economic growth is a possible contributor to the increase in number of hives.
When you talk about "increase in beehives", are you referring to hives that are managed by a beekeeper, or hives created by wild bees, and not managed by a human? When you talk about "fewer live bees", are you referring to wild bees, or bees in a managed hive? In my previous post, I was only referring to managed hives.
As an amateur beekeeper, I can tell you that honeybees _are_ wild, in a sense. A captured swarm is just a wild colony with the queen trapped in an excluder box in your hive.
They can't be domesticated, and containing them after they swarm involves tricking the bees into thinking they are the ones making a decision (you can turn their hive 90 degrees after they swarm in summer and they will return in most cases, assuming they've found a new spot for a hive).
Also, mites (and foul brood) are still a pain in the ass and I can see why bees need a beekeeper to even stand a chance.
I did a little more clicking around, and learned (wait for it) that native feral honeybees are probably gone in the UK as well. Honeybees in both the UK and North America are livestock, not wildlife.
Honeybees are indeed a non-native species to the US, but that doesn't mean there are not feral honeybees. They can survive just fine in the wild without us, as they did before they were domesticated, and they continue to do so as descendants of domesticated apis melifera and other species. This is the same as the wild boar which has existed in a feral state for centuries in the southern US, originally from domesticated pigs brought from Europeans. Calling apis melifera 'not wildlife' does not seem anywhere near accurate.
No feral honeybees? I can attest from personal experience down here in Texas there are a lot of wild apis melifera and many other honey bee species doing just fine without us. Maybe your definition of 'feral' isn't the same as mine, but this is plain wrong.
For the people saying she should go to the police about this: what crime (meaning something that would be criminally prosecuted as opposed to something that might be the cause of a civil suit) do you believe has been committed in this case (I'm not a lawyer; I don't know)? There was no mention of physical assault in the blog post. Even if this incident broke some law, how would there possibly be enough evidence to prosecute?
Wrt the argument that these things happen because guys will be guys or because nerds have grudges against women: That may be a reason, but it's not an excuse for this sort of behavior. People should be expected to act professionally when in a professional context.
As for whether publicly naming names accomplishes anything: If a person's sense of professionalism (not to mention simple human decency) is low enough to engage in blatant sexual harassment, they clearly need some external incentive to not behave in this way. How does that incentive get provided if the people being harassed keep it to themselves?
> For the people saying she should go to the police about this: what crime (meaning something that would be criminally prosecuted as opposed to something that might be the cause of a civil suit) do you believe has been committed in this case (I'm not a lawyer; I don't know)? There was no mention of physical assault in the blog post. Even if this incident broke some law, how would there possibly be enough evidence to prosecute?
Imagine a store owner standing by his entrance, letting people in one by one without even batting an eye. Then a woman approaches, he likes the look of her. He holds up his hand and says “Hold it! You may not enter unless you have sex with me.”
That doesn’t sound like extortion, sexual coercion and unlawful discrimination to you? Well, it does to any sane judge.
As for evidence: testimonies and/or email trails can produce plenty of evidence, easily.
I'd rather not "imagine" anything or speculate what a "sane judge" would think. What criminal law is being broken, given what we know? If you think it's obvious consider that sexual harassment in the workplace is usually considered a civil, not a criminal matter (though, in some circumstances it can be criminal).
As for the evidence, we don't really know what evidence exists in this particular case, but it seems premature to assume an e-mail trail or testimony other than the "he said/she said" variety.
It seems premature until you read the comments in her thread, wherein Tammy points out that she has received “an alarming number of emails” from other women who experienced the same or similar things.
And while I'm neither a lawyer nor that intimately familiar with US or California laws in particular, I'm fairly certain that this falls under extortion laws, as it is a form of oppressive exaction.
Is there any good evidence that the main problem with our schools is bad teaching? In other words, if you're going to spend money on improving educational outcomes, should you spend it on "better" teachers or on something like early childhood interventions, as per arguments like this:
(Ignoring for the moment that spending people's tax dollars on better teachers is politically more acceptable than spending it on targeted interventions.)
> Is there any good evidence that the main problem with our schools is bad teaching?
Not to my knowledge.
Ask any teacher (and they are the ones who know) what the main problem is, and they'll tell you that the problem isn't necessarily the schools, or teachers, or administration -- it's the parents. If parents do their job and make their kids' learning a priority, that would make the biggest improvement to the situation by far.
Yes. Beazley's essential reference is the way to go. The docs at the Python website are still essential for some things, though, since newer 2.X versions of Python often have minor changes/additions from previous versions, such as library changes and backports from Python 3.
Note the emphasis in all of this on "non-personal". As somebody else pointed out, Steve Jobs is technically correct in the statement he (supposedly) made.
One of the things driving this is that e-publishing has lowered the entry barrier for people who write "genre fiction". It's easier to get published and put your work out where an audience can find it. By "genre fiction", I mean stuff like military science fiction or vampire romances, etc, that has emotional appeal to a fairly specific audience. In the days before e-publishing, John Norman's Gor books would pretty obvious example of that sort of niche-appeal content.
For this sort of fiction, "well-written" is less important than pushing the right buttons (the plots are usually fairly predictable). To use an analogy, the rise of e-publishing is similar to the rise of blogging, in that they both allow for the easy production and consumption of targeted content (and predictable button-pushing is the raison d'etre of many blogs, particularly those discussing politics).
Note, I'm not claiming all e-publishing is genre-fiction or poorly written, just like all blogs don't fall into the predictable button-pushing category.
Yes, there are multiple issues: one of which is whether or not the government should be paying for NPR and foreign aid at all. But, what I think the original poster was responding to, and what the main purpose of the "receipt" is, is that most (or at at least very many) people don't know how government spending is apportioned.
Good "dictionaries" for doing on-line brute-force attacks don't just contain words, they contain likely passwords. Guidelines for choosing good passwords should point this out. For example, something like "J4fS!2" is a much much more secure password in terms of protection from on-line attacks than "letmein" or "chang3m3" or "tryandguessthis" or "password123" or "root!@#" or "b4ckm3upsc077y". All of those passwords are actual passwords taken from the list used by an SSH brute-force password cracker.
Because people aren't random when they choose words to remember (e.g. "beavisandbuthead" is also on that list), a better set of password-choosing directions would provide instructions one how to add some additional (pseudo-)randomness to passwords that are being created. The classic "pick a phrase, take the first letters + punctuation" method is one way to do that ("pap,ttfl+p" is a somewhat strong password), and it's not hard to think of other password generation schemes that also create strong passwords.
I think that the overall causes of obesity are fairly complex --- there's not some simple cause one can point to that is "the problem". But, threads like this one and the recent HN thread about Western diets remind me of this set of photos on "what the world eats":
