Just one small correction, which is in the article but somehow is wrong in the title.
Rainfall increases the ocean’s uptake of carbon by 6%, and the ocean accounts for one quarter of global uptake. So the amount we’re talking about here is 1.5% and doesn’t include the amount rainfall contributes to uptake of carbon on land unless we just chalk all rainfall up to oceanic uptake.
Oh! Awesome experiment! Yes, they’re shorter because of perspective (foreshortening). With a mirror surface it’s better to think of a duplicate of the object flipped across the mirror plane, then you can apply the same tricks to draw in perspective, which may make it look shorter.
In your example here, since we’re viewing from the side the perspective is not going to factor in as much, so we land at “roughly the same size”
If it helps, think of the water first like a perfect mirror. If it’s a perfectly flat mirror then it would look like there’s another duck upside down below this duck. If you want to be extra precise, it’s mirrored across the plane where the duck meets the water.
But water isn’t usually perfectly flat mirror, and here you have little nods to there being ripples or waves. The choppier the wave, the less it reflects, so you’ll often see people break up the mirrored reflection at the choppiest parts of the wave. Similarly, waves aren’t flat, depending on the part of the wave/ripple you’re at, you’d be reflecting higher or lower as though the mirror is tilted to the angle of the surface.
The last tricky part is that most surfaces are more reflective at a glancing angle than head on, so often reflections are stronger further in the distance and closer up you’ll just be looking down into the water. On a more technical note, you can look up the index of refraction to learn more about this phenomenon.
To tie it all together, this is why those long shots of sunsets have a sun reflection that is really long (much longer than the size of the sun in the distance) - because it’s at a distance it’s a strong reflection and because all the waves are reflecting at different angles you’re getting all the glancing reflections of the sun on the top of each wave. It typically being dark at sunset also means the bright sun reflection blooms to make it look brighter and larger than just the tip of the wave.
Conversely, in water sports like wakeboarding, you might not see much of a reflection at all because all the water is choppy and non-reflective.
Looking down into a pond, you might not see a reflection either because the angle is too steep to reflect.
In short, yes, in this case the reflection should probably be roughly the same size.
Permissive licenses permit a broader range of use compared to “copyleft” licenses.
“copyleft” here just being a cute way of being the opposite of copyright - instead of disallowing others from what they can do with “copyrighted” code, “copyleft” requires that they (upon request) share modifications to your code.
Permissive takes away this requirement to share your modifications. “copyleft” is considered more free and open source (FOSS), permissive is more business friendly.
If everything was equal (scale of production, subsidies, decades of shipping logistics worked out) I’d agree, but I don’t think vegan cheese is anywhere near that.
A good start would be to remove subsidies for livestock and their feedstocks. I think that would already bring the cost of vegan alternatives a lot closer.
I don’t trust any graph without at least its axes and captions, so here’s the source.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/consumerpriceinflation/april2024
While I think the message here is important, this particular plot seems to be of “Owner Occupier’s Housing Costs” and this capture conveniently crops the frame so that you don’t see the dip just before 2019.
Which part sounds off to you? This looks like a very reasonable paper hoping to distill traditional medicine into viable research paths, and does it using a pretty interesting model of compounds and effects.
If all you see is jibber jabber, maybe you should just default to trusting the experts on this one? Like, it’s not in an obscure journal - it’s a highly regarded peer reviewed journal. The authors aren’t random, they’re researchers at some of the best universities in the world (Nanjing University ranks #7 on the Nature Index).
The abstract is about as plain-speaking as it gets in the world of cutting edge research. You can probably look up the handful of domain-specific terminology and have a good grasp at what the research is about.
For those that need a translation:
“You have got to be shitting me”
“I am in fact not shitting you, my dude. It is very disappointing that this is real.”
I'd bet that they symlinked /ubuntu to the server's home root - probably for continuity with some previous file structure. It sure looks silly, but I'm sure the reasons for doing it were pretty reasonable.
For those that look at this and still think the solution might just be more money, first recognize that Google donates only to keep Firefox as a viable competitor to avoid anti-trust legislation.
If we raised half a million dollars, we haven’t saved anyone any money except Google - they’d simply donate only 100k next year so Firefox remains competitive, but not successful.
I don’t disagree with the sentiment of the post, but we also have to realize that we’d only be improving things after the first ~600k.
I don’t know anything about being an electrician - commercial or otherwise, so I’m curious to hear your side.
When all those people go to working remote, it’s not like they’re no longer in need of electricity. Presumably their home demand is higher and we might even see people adding new office spaces to adapt their home. Maybe the public grid needs to change to support it? Won’t this mean that there will just be a different type of demand for electricians?
Are there reasons this would be less attractive to electricians? Pay, job security, or something else?
If you’re just looking to get started with 3d modeling, it’s hard to beat Blender. At the cost of free, it’s by far the most affordable way to dip your toes in some modeling tools.
For many workflows it’s world class. If you plan to do more organic forms or don’t need technical precision, then it’s very competitive or preferable to paid software.
You might find it lacking if you plan to do parametric or technical CAD-style modeling. Even then, I think Blender can be a low cost way to learn what you want in your software before investing in more specialized software. You’ll learn enough of the modeling basics to more fluently navigate what other software provides.