Every manufacturer of hybrid and electric vehicles provides this level of detailed information to first responders. For example, here's the 36 page emergency response guide for the Ford Maverick:
Even conventional vehicles get at least a rescue sheet illustrating the location of hazards like the fuel tank, airbag inflators and seatbelt pre-tensioners.
Do first responders read these guides on the scene? Or do fire departments study them when a new one is released? Seems like a lot to study ahead of time, seems like a lot to read when lives are on the line.
A motor vehicle extrication is a very technical exercise — firefighters don’t just jump out of the truck and start hacking into a car.
They followed a structured arrival and size-up process that (among many other things) involves identifying and neutralising hazards, such as airbags. To do that, they’ll flick through the rescue guide to find out the locations of things like batteries, and other specific details relevant to the task at hand.
>There are many, many psychedelics. They have sometimes radical differences.
Psilocybin is a more selective 5-HT2A agonist than LSD and is more rapidly metabolised. At normal recreational or clinical doses, they really aren't very different. LSD isn't quite as well-researched as psilocybin as a psychiatric drug, but the data we have suggests that it isn't meaningfully different in terms of risks or benefits.
Sorry, but the answer is almost certainly no. We now have good quality data on psylocybin as a treatment for depression; at best, it's slightly more effective than existing treatments, at the cost of a small but significant increased risk side-effects (primarily severe acute anxiety and psychosis, possibly HPPD). We have less data on other psychedelics and other conditions, but none of it looks spectacular when you take into account the usual biases affecting small trials of novel treatments.
Psychedelics are likely to be a good option for some patients, it's good to have another tool in the armamentarium, but the idea that they're a revolution in psychiatry is simply no longer credible.
This is a treatment that can help people. just because it didn't help you does not mean it's ineffective in totality which is the stance you seem to take.
The question posed is "Could psilocybin be the key to treating anorexia?". Psychedelics are effective in treating some psychiatric disorders - I've been clear about that - but they are (at best) only marginally more effective than most existing treatments. That's a good thing, it will help some patients, but it's a million miles from being the key treatment.
Living standards for ordinary people only started to improve in any meaningful way after the industrial revolution, a fact which is immediately obvious if you compare across generations. Technological progress gave us all of the things that distinguish the lives of 21st century Americans from the lives of medieval peasants. Central heating, indoor plumbing, electric lighting, general anaesthesia, antibiotics, automobiles, aircraft, limitless entertainment, food so abundant that poor people are obese. If you think that technological progress is intrinsically bad because it hasn't brought about a utopia of perfect equality, then I really don't know what to say to you.
No, you’re totally misunderstanding me, I don’t think technology progress is correlated with progress for humans at all. The point is only the post war period when taxes were 90%+ for the wealthy aligned with a growing middle class and a welfare state I.e. hospitals and housing for the poorest.
Nigel Farage is the incumbent Member of Parliament for Clacton and the de-facto leader of Reform UK, a populist right-wing party that has only a handful of MPs but is currently leading the polls. He is being investigated by the Parliamentary Standards Committee over personal donations he accepted prior to becoming an MP. In response to this investigation, Farage stood down as MP, triggering a by-election (a special election held when an MP resigns, dies or is otherwise removed from their seat mid-term).
Farage announced his intention to stand in this by-election (which he is entitled to do), arguing that only his constituents had the right to decide whether he was fit to be a Member of Parliament. He argues that the Standards Committee is fundamentally illegitimate because he would be judged by his political rivals; in any case, the greatest sanction the committee could impose would be his expulsion from parliament, which would trigger a by-election that he would be entitled to stand in. The other major parties have all decided not to stand candidates against Farage in the Clacton by-election, creating this slightly farcical contest between the incumbent and a joke candidate.
Has any group of workers ever "won" a long-term victory against a new technology? There are plenty of short-term concessions made in the face of powerful trade union opposition, but I can't think of any technology that was just stopped dead to appease workers with obsolete skills.
That assumes we're talking about technologies that are legal and in some way beneficial. AI is basically large-scale copyright infringement. If allowed to continue, human authors (I'm including programmers here) will eventually just stop publishing, because why feed the machine that's busy replacing you? You're not even getting paid for it, because the magic box can do the same thing you can for cheaper.
Thing is, everything AI produces is derivative; it cannot make anything truly original. Therefore widespread AI adoption will inevitably lead to scientific and cultural stagnation.
So we'll have our magic box that can perform our every wish. And we'll all be worse off for it.
Ergonomics. Any solid-body guitar that's designed to be comfortable when played sitting or standing will converge on a strat-ish body shape. You can make a computer mouse in any shape, but the shape of a comfortable mouse is constrained by the shape of an average human palm.
The various curves and bevels on the Stratocaster aren't arbitrary aesthetic features, they're affordances to fit the human body. Change them too much and you get a guitar that won't balance on your knee or that pokes you in the ribs or that limits your access to the high frets.
Ola Strandberg set out to design the most ergonomic guitar possible. His design is both radical and basically derivative of the Strat, because Leo Fender happened to find something close to the perfect solution in 1954.
But, for example, are those horns (?) necessary for ergonomics? Do the potentiometers and output jack have to be positioned like that? Does the pickguard has to be the same shape? I do not think so. Les Pauls have different shape and are pretty popular too.
> Ola Strandberg set out to design the most ergonomic guitar possible
It looks somewhat ... not how you expect the guitar to look.
> But, for example, are those horns (?) necessary for ergonomics?
More or less, yes.
If you "fill" the cutways on a Strat you have a typical guitar shape.
You want the upper horn there or somewhere near it because the upper strap lug needs to be about there for balance, but some players (especially those with bigger hands) will want their thumb to be free from being blocked by the top of the guitar while they are playing the higher frets, so there's a cutaway. You then want the lower horn to have some of the classic shape below it if you want the guitar to be playable sitting down.
The slope across the top corner of the Strat beyond the bridge is there so that players (in particular guitarists who wear their guitars a bit higher with the fretboard pointing more upwards) don't have the upper arm of their right hand leaning uncomfortably across the edge of the guitar.
Some of these elements were protected by Leo Fender's original design patent, I think, but I can't remember which.
Precisely this. Ticketmaster's entire business model is based around taking the blame. Artists don't want to set a face value for their tickets that represent a realistic market-clearing price, for fear of being seen as greedy; this leaves a lot of money on the table for scalpers. TM scrape as much of that value back for artists and venues, who get a cut of all the fees and charges and "authorized secondary resale". Selling tickets is the easy part; the secret sauce is selling tickets for as much as possible, while allowing the artists to pretend that they're being sold for a "fair" price.
As a Brit, it seems hilarious that a single person with an income of $97k would be on the poverty line. That's more than double the median income for all households in the UK. A lot of Americans don't seem to realise how fantastically wealthy they are compared to the rest of the world.
That’s a completely absurd number. No single person making just under $100k a year is living in poverty. Even in a high cost of living area.
The article also repeatedly discussed median salaries, but average costs.
And it includes full time daycare costs for young children that only last for a few years.
Also housing prices are high but you can certainly afford an apartment as a single person making $100k a year. But if you want to save, having a roommate doesn’t mean you are living in poverty.
Comparing countries can be relatively pointless because of all the differences. It only matters if you can obtain money in one country and spend it in another.
The main way these numbers are gamed is by finagling with healthcare and post-secondary education, each of which can be as high or as low as you want, depending on what you’re torturing the numbers to confess.
$97k per year isn’t that much when health insurance premiums are $500 to $1,500 per person per month with $5k to $15k annual out of pocket maximums. You have to build up decent savings to ensure you can take care of yourself for when you lose your income.
This doesn't look like too expensive if you compare it with Switzerland or with Germany assuming similar annual income. In Switzerland unlike in US your children stay on your plan until they turn 18, not 26 like in US. In both Germany and Switzerland, health insurance is mandatory and not employer-based - so you cannot simply say "no". In fact, in Germany you pay much more than in US as a share of your income, especially if your income is at least like 30% more than a national median: 1000+ EUR is a minimum per person per month (probably higher today). It doesn't cover dental care - you will pay in full - that's why many people travel to Turkey, or Eastern Europe, or to Baltic countries - just to take some dental care - which is extremely expensive in any German speaking country - we are talking about multiple months of your income after taxes.
> In both Germany and Switzerland, health insurance is mandatory and not employer-based - so you cannot simply say "no". In fact, in Germany you pay much more than in US as a share of your income, especially if your income is at least like 30% more than a national median: 1000+ EUR is a minimum per person per month (probably higher today). It doesn't cover dental care - you will pay in full - that's why many people travel to Turkey, or Eastern Europe, or to Baltic countries - just to take some dental care - which is extremely expensive in any German speaking country - we are talking about multiple months of your income after taxes.
By that definition someone making the equivalent of $100k in Germany could be “worried about healthcare”. And in many countries with public healthcare, people are worried about paying for access to better private healthcare.
So by the metric of “worrying about healthcare access” almost no one is above the poverty line.
There are people in the US making $100k who are genuinely worried about healthcare access. Say someone who retires early at 55 and has enough savings to provide $100k income but is 10 years away from Medicare. But acting like it is at all remotely normal for a single person making $100k to lack healthcare access or to be “living in poverty” by any objective measure is absurd.
Not any more. A new generation of locks have an abrasive-filled plastic layer that aggressively wears down angle grinder discs. They aren't completely immune to angle grinders, but the better locks will take 20 minutes and multiple cutting discs to defeat.
https://www.ford.com/acslibs/content/dam/na/ford/en_us/image...
Even conventional vehicles get at least a rescue sheet illustrating the location of hazards like the fuel tank, airbag inflators and seatbelt pre-tensioners.