Bernoulli’s principle is certainly involved, but the full explanation is more complicated and arguably beyond high school level:
Although the two simple Bernoulli-based explanations above are incorrect, there is nothing incorrect about Bernoulli’s principle or the fact that the air goes faster on the top of the wing, and Bernoulli’s principle can be used correctly as part of a more complicated explanation of lift.
But on a fundamental level, in the least instance admins have to be able to know who votes for our version of the system to even work compared to the competition.
Could you elaborate on this claim? Because I don’t really see why that would be true.
You could bring them to Mars and burn them there. Thicken up the atmosphere a bit, maybe add some water.
Yeah I agree I hate this kind of obstructive customer service
I work as a software engineer on automated customer service systems like these, and boy let me tell you, obstruction is the name of the game. For example: don’t make the phone number too easy to find on the website because it will lead to too many calls. We nudge people toward the FAQ and such first so they can hopefully find their answer there. Then, we have chatbots like this which contain exactly the same information as the FAQ again. And only then might we offer you contact with a human.
The essential problem is that support is a cost center, so cost savings is the name of the game. We optimize for metrics like:
If you manage to get on text chat with a human, typically they are handling two other conversations at the same time, that’s why they seem so absent all the time (and why companies love chat. Much cheaper than calling).
I’m not saying we’re all diabolical here. There is a general agreement among everyone in the industry that we should help the customer as well as we possibly can. Indeed every CS manager will tell you how important we are to our brand image and NPS, how we strive to be the most customer-friendly company etc. etc.
But the numbers don’t lie. If you look at the metrics that everyone actually optimizes for, it’s cost cost cost.
It’s quite possible they simply make their sushi smaller, depending where you live. Americans tend to make things a size or two bigger than a lot of the rest of the world.
Generally, if you want to pass food to someone, put it on a plate so they can pick it up themselves.
The only reason to use the back of the chopsticks, is if there is a shared plate of food in the center without a separate set of serving chopsticks. Taking from the shared plate with chopsticks that have been in your mouth could be considered unhygienic. You can use the back of the chopsticks to move the food to your own plate, then eat it.
However this is more like advanced etiquette and not a crucial rule, in my opinion. The only really bad things to avoid are sticking your chopsticks upright into rice and passing food between chopsticks.
The only one I really would avoid is passing things between or touching chopsticks together. This is reminiscent of Japanese funeral rituals and thus considered rude to do at the table.
The others are more about common sense and trying to help you enjoy the sushi as the chef intended:
But again, these are suggestions. Enjoy the sushi how you like, you’re not hurting anyone.
That’s not usually the case in a high-end sushi place. The chef will prepare your orders one by one and serve them out as soon as each is completed, so you will get one piece at a time.
When I was in Japan, you could indicate when ordering whether you wanted wasabi and the chef would place a dab between the rice and the fish. My understanding is that real wasabi loses flavour very fast after being grated. Placing it so it doesn’t contact air helps to preserve flavour.
I would not say real wasabi tastes nothing like the horseradish fake. You can tell the plant is still part of the horseradish/mustard family. It’s definitely a more “clean” flavour though. It’s pretty easy to tell when you get the real thing. The fake stuff looks like a quite intensely green uniform mushy paste. The real stuff looks a bit like grated ginger, but with a pale green colour, often with some variation in colouration.
You do you my man. Go hogwild.
Wikipedia says you are incorrect:
The dish was created by, and named after, Mexican restaurateur Ignacio Anaya, who created it in 1943 for American customers at the Victory Club restaurant in Piedras Negras, Coahuila.
That’s just south of the border in Mexico.
On the upside, dying saves a lot of carbon emissions /s
IATA defines short haul as a total flight length under three hours, medium haul as 3-6 hours, long haul as 6-16 hours, and ultra long haul as 16 hours and above.
ICAO has other definitions, and doesn’t consider medium haul as a separate category. Some airlines and airports also have their own, distance-based definitions.
I don’t really care about the declarative/imperative thing, to me how many commands you “really need” is beside the point. This is essentially the same argument as the people who say “git is not complex because you only really need checkout/commit/push, just ignore all the other commands.” This doesn’t matter when the official documentation and web resources keep talking about the other billion commands. Even home-manager has this warning at the very top of the page that basically tells you “you need to understand all the other commands first before you use this,” and “if your directory gets messed up you have to fix it yourself.”
These are exactly the same kinds of problems people have with git.
The confusion arises because there are 5 different ways to do the same thing, the non-experimental methods shouldn’t be used even though they’re recommended in the official docs
I appreciate what you’re trying to say, but you’re kind of illustrating exactly the point I was making about conceptual simplicity and atrocious UX.
Nix has the same mix of conceptual simplicity and atrocious user interface as git, but somehow magnified three times over. I’ve tried it multiple times, but could never get over the unintuitive gaggle of commands.
That doesn’t mean energy has a weight.
No, it literally does mean that. If you put light in a box of mirrors the total weight of the box will literally increase by an amount equal to the energy of the photons. If you put some radioactive material in a theoretically perfectly sealed box from which no heat or light could escape, and weigh it while it decays into radiation, the weight will not change.
This applies to all forms of energy. A spring is heavier when compressed. An object gets heavier when you spin it, or heat it up. Sunlight hitting the earth most definitely makes it heavier. In fact, the sun hits the earth with about 4.4*10^16 watts of power, corresponding to about 0.5 kilogram per second.
The numbers are different because the site doesn’t naively count every line but merges some as a single package. For example, at the very top of the Debian list we have 0ad, 0ad-data, 0ad-data-common. These are all counted as one single “package.”
One might argue that doing the comparison in that way is more useful to an average user asking “which distribution has more software available.”
They say that because https://repology.org/repositories/statistics/total says so. Debian unstable has 38k packages according to that page.
I think it’s more so that the kind of people contributing to these projects are on balance not that interested in doing the marketing work.