@ChaosEngine

I fully agree with you that rape/sexual assault is a bigger problem (in magnitude and frequency) than false accusations. And that being an actual victim of sexual assault would be worse than being falsely accused of sexual assault, although it seems a bit pointless to debate the relative extent of how much these things could fuck up lives when they are both horrendous.

That being said, there's a reason that presumption of innocence and requiring proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt are the law of the land. And assuming that we follow through on those things (which I think we largely do), that's all well and good. BUT, that's all pretty strictly just in the legal realm.

False accusations of sexual assault don't need to get as far as the actual legal system to seriously fuck up a person's life. Employers, partners, friends ... these connections might choose to sever ties without requiring the same rigorous proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt that the legal system does.

As much as I personally tend to believe Ford as opposed to Kavanaugh, I think that given the span of time since the incident it is nigh on impossible to prove that her version of events is true beyond a reasonable doubt. On the other hand, the hearing put his current demeanor and partisan/biased attitude on blatant display in a way that seemed to me should be disqualifying with regards to the sort of standards we require for Supreme Court Justices. Apparently the GOP disagrees, and we can hold them to account for that at the ballot box.

That's rather cold comfort given that Justices serve for life. There'd be some constitutional crisis drama if Agent Orange gets removed from office as a result of some proof-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt of misdeeds. Robert Kennedy's quote about the ancient Chinese curse "may you live in interesting times" seems apropos. Things have been entirely too "interesting" for my taste for the past 2 years...

It isn't as rare as you think. There are numerous accounts of false accusations that don't make it as far as court or they do and the accused choose to take a plea versus chancing half their life.

Brent E. Turvey, a criminologist, wrote a 2017 book that dispels this notion. His research, and that of two co-authors, cited statistical studies and police crime reports. One academic study showed that as many as 40 percent of sexual assault charges are false. Mr. Turvey wrote that the FBI in the 1990s pegged the falsity rate at 8 percent for rape or attempted rape complaints.

“There is no shortage of politicians, victims’ advocates and news articles claiming that the nationwide false report for rape and sexual assault is almost nonexistent, presenting a figure of around 2 percent,” writes Mr. Turvey, who directs the Forensic Criminology Institute. “This figure is not only inaccurate, but also it has no basis in reality. Reporting it publicly as a valid frequency rate with any empirical basis is either scientifically negligent or fraudulent.”

A recent study supports this assessment. The Pentagon issues an annual report on sexual assaults in the military. Nearly one-quarter of all cases last year were thrown out for lack of evidence, according to a report released in May.

As far as the rape every 98 seconds, I am unsure where you found that number. There were 95,730 rapes under the revised FBI definitions (which include more categories that previously were not considered rape, like child molestion, under the legacy definitions) in the last year I could find which was 2016. These are the combined rapes of men, women, and children for that year. That means the actual rape of a 'person' is occurring somewhere around every 5-6 minutes. Now if you are going by a different statistic, like the CDC ones that include such a wide definition of what constitutes 'rape' that it isn't funny, you might get the result you quoted. I wouldn't go by those stats, even TIME magazine had to call out the CDC for overstating the numbers.

As far as Trump goes, he is a complete idiot dickhead. He shouldn't have insulted anyone, least of all Dr. Ford. I will point out one thing though, and this is subjective in that your viewpoint will differ from mine, Dr. Ford is an alleged rape survivor. She has made the claim and took a polygraph test, but other than that she can only claim that in her recollection she was at a party where Brett Kavanaugh was also at supposedly. She also claimed to be heavily intoxicated. If you want to believe her Ex, she has lied in her testimony. (https://heavy.com/news/2018/10/christine-ford-boyfriend-ex-letter-blasey/) Heavy leans left, so this isn't a bobknight cherry picking of information.

Now, why would she come forth and deal with all the negatives of making the claim? I guess that is the kicker, normally you would expect a person to really be telling the truth if they are going to be put through hell. I would put forward though that this was one of the most hotly contested confirmations for SCOTUS ever. Even more so than for Bork, and I remember that one clearly. In my opinion, far more than for Thomas. If you were adamantly opposed to a person sitting on the Supreme Court, had went to school with that person, and were willing to fall on your sword for your beliefs, you might do it.

In any case, that is just supposition on my part.

No, it's just not germane.

You are ignoring they clearly identified the ship before jamming emergency channels and attacking it and it's lifeboats, war crimes even if they hadn't identified it, war crimes even if it was Egyptian.

You are also ignoring that the American ship apparently never fired (it certainly would have if it were Egyptian)and was identified, and that specifically American and international radio frequencies (not all frequencies, the jamming was targeted) were jammed, so there's only evidence they knew it was not a combatant, and none to indicate they thought it was one.

Yes, if we didn't have the tapes that were hidden for decades, that lie that they thought it was an enemy combatant might still fly. (It would not excuse the war crimes) Because we do have the tapes and testimonies proving they knew it was American, or at the extreme least given every possible doubt had confusion as to who the ship belonged to, that long standing excuse no longer stands up and another explanation for why they secretly knowingly attacked their allies and hid that fact must be correct.

Yes. Distrust of one untrustworthy nation doesn't translate into trust of their untrustworthy enemies.

International distress frequencies jammed. That's war crime #1. Firing on lifeboats, war crime #2.
You can convince yourself that their unambiguous identification of it as an American ship before attacking is meaningless, you still can't excuse the multiple war crimes.

I hope you at least extend a similar mistrust towards Nasser's Egypt and the Assad dynasty in Syria?

I know it's a stretch, but in wartime telling the difference between an American spyship and Egyptian one could be tough. Jacking up an American flag and using a different frequency for communications is something an enemy might be devious enough to think of...

I don't trust Israel, not even a little bit....with good reason....and it's not my video.

Btw, you should look into what the word "literally" means, or learn to count, because there were literally 8 words in the first identification message, and it's just one of many. 8 words are all you need to hear them identify the ship.

Specifically jamming American military frequencies and international distress frequencies is a dead giveaway they knew who they were shooting at.....as if the recordings of the identification weren't enough.

Opening fire on lifeboats is another war crime.

So you didn't watch the video, where they included audio of them identifying the ship prior to attacking and again afterwards.

I guess you didn't read any comments either, because a few reasons why they would do this have been given.

If unmarked ships/planes were targets, they might have attacked themselves as the attacking planes were also unmarked.

They knew the American ship was there, we told them beforehand. As mentioned in the video, they had to know which frequencies to jam, and they jammed American frequencies, not Egyptian. Again, watch the video, they identified it as American before sinking it.

"On Feb 20th 2017 Air Navigation Services Czech Republic reported, that the actual communication for the hand off from Bratislava to Prague at 15:53Z had been correct (frequency 132.890MHz transmitted and acknowledged), however, the crew subsequently tuned frequency 132.980MHz, the crew did not monitor the emergency frequency. Prague Center spotted another Jet Airways aircraft, flight 9W-122 from Delhi (India) to London Heathrow, flying under control of Rhein Control (Germany) south of the Czech Republic, via Rhein Control and 9W-122 an ACARS message was transmitted to 9W-118 asking them to contact (Prague Center) frequency 132.065MHz. When 9W-118 reported on that frequency at 16:26Z (loss of communication thus lasted for 33 minutes), the aircraft was already in German Airspace and was instructed to contact Rhein Control. Czech ATC immediately informed their military counterpart (Czech control and reporting center) that contact had been re-established."

https://www.aeroinside.com/item/9114/jet-airways-b773-near-cologne-on-feb-16th-2017-loss-of-communication-leads-to-intercept

The crew swapped some digits on channel handover that lead to a comms blackout of 33 minutes. Euro jets already in the air intercepted the passenger jet over Germany and escorted to England.

Those boys and girls don't mess around.

also @eric3579

To clarify a Thousand Year Storm isn't only going to happen once in a thousand years. There is always a probability that it can happen. Some of this could easily be 'bad luck'.

The phenomenon that created this situation is known as cell training, and happens all over the place. However, it is worthwhile noting what else they say, "...scientific studies have shown a statistically meaningful uptick in the frequency of extreme rain events over the eastern United States. Statistically, over the long term, these types of extreme floods are probably becoming more common, in areas that are normally rainy as a result of global warming."

What this means, at least the way I understand it, is that statistically in this region we can expect a higher probability of these 'xxx year storms' every time conditions are favorable for cell training style weather.

We can expect more of these types of storms, simply because the climate is in a format that creates more ideal conditions. These ideal conditions are not limited to just this type of weather, either. Gulf hurricanes, tornado alley tornadoes, and other 'regional' weather patterns are also experiencing 'ideal' conditions to allow stronger, more damaging storms to develop.

It all must have to do with your speaker set up, and the frequencies range your speakers use. I have computer speakers (also headphones) which generally cut off much/some of the mid and all of the low end frequencies. I'm guessing if i had good full range speakers and an eq i could hear both. I'd guess if we all listened from the same source, we would all hear the same thing. Although (in general) as you get older the frequency range you are able to hear diminishes quite a bit.

Yeah, the whiteboard wasn't the most elegant way to convey that information, but it's quick and efficient, and it's still better than having one of the characters flat-out say that stuff even though they'd all know it already.

As for the second issue, as greatgooglymoogly mentioned, they're only able to shoot the creature because of the dumb luck of the frequency of the hearing aid weakening it and causing its armour to pop off. Deus ex machina, maybe, but the film spends enough time planting that seed that it doesn't feel too blatant.

I agree for the most part, but with batteries, now becoming reasonable in size and price, it's not so hard to be totally off grid. Micro hydro can also be efficient power storage if properly designed with a dual reservoir system.
Granted, that seems to work best in small scale setups so far, but there is an island .....(https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/09/17/349223674/tiny-spanish-island-nears-its-goal-100-percent-renewable-energy)
...currently (since 2014) using this tech to be nearly 100% green.

Dismissing projections as unrealistic without fully examining them may doom our economy and planet.
That's what happened with solar, people just claimed it's expensive and unreliable, which meant those they convinced didn't know how wrong that is, and didn't buy systems or support solar farms. I ignored them and did some light math, and found that even an expensive high tech system with batteries, professionally installed, would pay for itself in about 8 years, with a 20 year expected lifespan (and I live in Humboldt county, with the foggiest airport in America, not Arizona). I'm damn glad I didn't listen. Even a 2 year delay would have cost me 1/2 my rebates, making the system take an extra 2+ years to pay for itself by costing me thousands upon thousands of dollars (instead of saving me thousands per year).

Edit: Also, here in Humboldt we just switched to choice in electricity, we can choose regular pge power (mostly old school generation), a mixture of up to 75% (I think, maybe higher) renewable for cheaper, or 100% renewable for more. All 3 now bill transmission (including voltage/frequency regulation) separately, so it's easy to see what generation alone costs. It's clear so far that mostly renewable is the best bet economically, and I assume it will become more renewable as new technologies become available.....at least I hope so.

Hardly a brilliant analysis - more like a brilliant piece of advocacy that, like most of its kind, is long on optimistic projections and very short on real numbers and a real analysis of those numbers. For instance: what is the megawatt hour cost of a solar power generation station that can replicate the power responsiveness and availability factor of a fossil power generation station (over a similar life cycle). He quotes the kwh cost for solar and wind power systems but each and every one of them is "backed up" by a much larger conventional power generation system that, ultimately, is burdened with the costs of maintaining grid stability, grid voltage, and grid frequency. There are huge engineering problems and substantial costs associated with maintaining a power supply that we now require to operate a modern economy. Just ONCE, I would like to see the green power advocates address those challenges and costs in a realistic way instead of glossing over them with their fantasy projections.
And I will say, as an aside, that I have spent my entire working career working in the renewable energy sector and fully agree that we need to transition to a renewable energy economy - but unrealistic projections are going to doom our economy if they are taken as being possible in the near term.

Really cool. I remember a CS class I took talking about frequency tables for longer chains (ala .zip as he mentioned), but I don't remember the same class mentioning Huffman trees first, which seems like it would clearly be a better way to explain.

Maybe I was out to lunch that day.

Maybe a variable frequency drive ramping up speed, combined with wheel slip causing the sound? I've never heard an electric motor make a sound like that.