I assume they are referring to the channel timing? Cellular frequencies are segmented into time segments where each channel is allowed to be used by only some devices when it is their "turn" to transmit (this allows multiple phones to share the same frequency at the same time).
Elimination is not the same as separating someone from the hazard. Edit: elimination is (re)moving the hazard and a control is adding a barrier or moving the person
Elimination is completely getting rid of the hazard. (In the case of x-ray it would be just not doing an x-ray at all)
Phased array speakers can focus sound in a specific direction. The visuals I don't have a good answer for but the sound part could definitely be done with existing technology
Another big benefit of these older devices is customizability and repairability. I am working to refurbish an MPC1000 right now (drum machine) and the fact that it is repairable at all was a big factor in choosing to sell a newer, nicer device in favor of an older one that wasn't fully working.
Not everything can be treated that way, like a phone or a laptop I would prefer to be no more than 5 years old. But so many things don't need to be terribly modern in order to work well.
Phonics certainly doesn't _feel_ like the best way to teach English, but hopefully we now have enough data to show that it is at least acceptable. A big factor too is "can it be taught at scale". You don't only have to teach the students, you have to teach the teachers how to teach the new methods. Much like NCLB, these changes are well-meaning but we really need to stop rolling things out nationally only to find out they harm outcomes.
> Phonics certainly doesn't _feel_ like the best way to teach English
Phonics is not about "teaching English" in some fuzzy generic sense, it's specifically aimed towards teaching English written orthography, starting from its phonetics. I.e. teaching fluent speakers of English to read.
Probably because English is so very non-phonetic. To repeat an ancient joke, "Hookt awn fonix werkt fer mee".
I could also see it resulting in more subvocalization, but my assumption is that subvocalization is actually a very important short-term strategy that almost always goes away quickly.
It'd be super cool if English orthography were allowed to keep up with the times, but we've never been more anal about spelling than we are right now, lol.
Yes, of course it was easy to read. It was spelled phonetically. That's the point.
Calling English "fairly phonetic" is laughable. In most languages, they don't have spelling bees because they don't understand the concept. How would you not know how to spell the word after someone speaks it?
My understanding (mostly from my speech pathologist brother ranting about this) is that we end up with reading/writing tending to lag about two years behind due to it.
Given that that's something like half of our lexicon, you're going to have a heck of a time reading if you can't process any of them, but okay, let's look just at words that come from Old English:
Totally right. I shoot almost exclusively with a 50mm prime and make heavy use of cropping. I get to carry a very light, small, and FAST lens that works in many different situations without needing a flash. Modern cameras have such high resolution that the output still has good quality even after significant cropping.
There are some situations where "zooming with your feet" is the right answer and others where it is impossible. Try everything.
Is this actually happening? I have seen this idea thrown out a lot online but it always feels like a conspiracy theory to me (akin to "fine art is a tax write-off")
This is the case for the city of Boston. The city derives the vast majority of its budget from commercial property taxes, it's why residential property taxes are so low in the city.
Use to work for a company that was literally told by the city that if they don't have X amount of people in the building they will lose their tax incentives they got for having the company there. The company slowly mandated hybrid then RTO everyday in about 6 months. Got out 2 weeks before it was implemented. My coworkers were extremely jealous that I got a WFH job.
I think part of the equation is that less people are going into the office so values of buildings are going down, less people in downtown the less money that goes to all the restaurants/shops/stores during the week.
I can't speak for other cities since I don't live in them but Boston has never really recovered from the pandemic in terms of office workers.
Because that’s what feeds local businesses especially shops and service oriented jobs. I’m not saying I care that happens because remote workers can do that closer to their home so it’s a net zero game, but not in the eyes of business owners downtown or the mayors of said downtowns.
People being downtown are people more likely to spend money downtown then someone who lives in the suburbs and doesn't come to downtown. Therefore more sales taxes collected, more businesses in downtown, etc...
For Boston in particular, governmental borders are close to downtown. The city is composed of several unconsolidated abutting Towns and Cities. The City of Boston[1] mostly extends from downtown to the south-west. So MIT/Harvard are Town of Cambridge, not City of Boston. Downtown-vs-suburb revenue tensions extend into the city.
For analogy, imagine the historical City of New York (Manhattan and Bronx) never consolidated with the City of Brooklyn and the city and towns of Queens County, to form a City of Greater New York. WFH Queens would be as bad for Manhattan as WFH New Jersey. Not only loss of going-to-work-associated revenue, but little home-associated. As it is, the mayor vocally pushed for back-to-office (real-estate interests are powerful in NYC, transit budget income, CRE better-vacant-than-cheaper dysfunction, etc).
Because then transit, services, restaurants, stores, dry-cleaners, gyms fail, and the taxbase collapses (every city has a different mix of commercial vs residential property tax vs sales-tax).
DowntownRecovery.com project mapped this (using cellphone user data, at least)
It's not just downtown that matters, it is the total population living in the city. People working from home will live away from Boston or other major cities. If they need to work in a downtown office the same people will be forced to live in Boston or close by.
Yes, Amazon needs people to fill their expensive offices in Seattle, or otherwise explain to investors that they wasted billions of dollars building new offices that were used less than 5 years.
>> otherwise explain to investors that they wasted billions of dollars building new offices that were used less than 5 years.
So what? I mean companies write down things all the time. "We've revalued our $billion office and adjusted our balance sheet to match. Cause was a global pandemic which we considered as a risk factor in 2019, but it was negligible."
Stock will drop a % or two for a week, then recover and move on (especially as the Amazon machine continues to print cash.)
Microsoft wrote off the Nokia purchase with a shrug and the world just moved on.
Explaining a change of work environment to investors seems like a pretty minor bump, not a major factor in decision making.
I agree in that I don't think explaining a write off is a problem, per se. But I do see Amazon taking a long term view of their real estate investment and saying "OK we have it in our power to make this payoff" which dynamic is not in play with most writedowns.
I bet there are some incentives in there but it's not the whole picture. It's probably the combination of many things but mostly management that don't know how to manage people remotely, or they started to realise that most middle manager positions are obsolete/unnecessary.
“You don't need a formal conspiracy when interests converge. These people went to the same universities, they're on the same boards of directors, they're in the same country clubs, they have like interests, they don't need to call a meeting, they know what's good for them and they're getting it.”
I have an alarm clock like this and still use it almost daily. The one that I use has an alternate dismissal method for anything fixed to a certain location. (Barcodes, etc.)
My sleep has gotten consistent enough over the years that I could probably get by without it, but it did help significantly with building the habits in the first place.
CAN (or one of its more modern variants) are historically more common in automotive. However with 2-wire Ethernet connections becoming more commonplace I do think you're right that more and more cars will be moving to ethernet fieldbus.
EtherNet/IP is not as robust for many applications as its competitors (PROFINET, EtherCAT) since it is not fully deterministic. EtherCAT is my personal favorite.
