ta92929's comments

I'm confused. It sounds like they though neutrinos were Weyl points, and neutrinos are real particles. But it also sounds like this experiment created quasiparticles. So are Weyl points still a proposed real particle? Or was it only ever theorized to be some kind of emergent phenomenon? Or did they really create a new type of real particle?

The first is rather well protected. They tried to ban animal snuff videos for example and it was overturned. Hate speech is protected as well, whereas it is prohibited in most (all?) European countries.

You can buy ammunition in Switzerland in a gun store with nothing more than the equivalent of a an American "background check", i.e. no criminal convictions and/or mental health history.

Why do you feel that way? Biologically that's not really the way humans were designed. It's unfortunate that the modern first world economy and society is so incompatible with biology.

I know this is just pissing in the wind (and you just used the term from the article), but "gun safety" already means something. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_safety> This type of language engineering annoys me.

I have always wondered how dance/ballet is recorded, and I'm not surprised it comes down to video. But music is more limited data I think, an opinion supported by the fact that sheet music exists and sheet dance is still questionable.

There's a passage in a piano piece I'm having trouble with and I tried watching videos of pros on youtube to figure out how to play it. It was frustrating and almost useless. The video goes by too fast. Granted, I was looking for technical details, not notes, but I think notes would be almost as hard.

E.g. Can you tell what notes are being played in the video below?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8IHzqVKugE&t=35

Here's another fun one to try:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpXqdBKSSFo&t=4m51s

That's insane.

Forced by who? The management? Or did they do it themselves for their own benefit?

Did you even read the thread?

"Accommodating them" referred to moving the designated smoking area so that the other poster's path wasn't near it. So "accommodating them" means making a small effort so both smokers and non smokers can get what they want. It does not mean forcing non smokers to breathe smoke.

That sounds plausible to me, I'm not an expert, but it's not always a choice for the bands.

Pearl Jam tried to stand up to Ticketmaster with a boycott and lost.

How did Metallica put it?

  Love is control
  I'll die if I let go

  I see no particular reason to accommodate them.

Because they're people? And they're accommodating you by smoking only where it's allowed? So maybe out of the kindness of your heart you could leave them a place to smoke?

  Off campus, preferably.  If you can't go eight hours 
  without your drug of choice (especially one that harms 
  the people around you when you use it), perhaps you have 
  a bigger problem than an intentional lack of 
  accommodations at your workplace.

See above.

By certain places I meant New York City.

Do a lot of people in NYC have "outdoors" on their own property? I suspect not. Do a lot of people in NYC even own their own homes? Because most rentals disallow smoking. So in order to smoke, you have to outright buy a house or condo. Yeah, that's a reasonable compromise.

They're complaining because they see the general trend.

When it's getting to the point where you don't just have to go outside, which is reasonable, or even go outside but avoid high traffic areas, but instead to go to this one specific spot outside, and there are people advocating banning smoking outdoors altogether it starts to get ridiculous.

I find it a strange comparison to the marijuana legalization movement.

EDIT: correction: they have actually banned smoking outside in certain places. (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/23/new.york.smoking.ban/) So you can't smoke indoors. You can't smoke outdoors. But fuck 'em, they're smokers, so who cares.

They are not a protected class, but that doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to screw them over. In your example, they could just move the smoking area, couldn't they?

What if the phishing site also has a 0 day?

The strangest part of that article is this:

  I understand how ingrained the “guys” habit might be for 
  some of you. It was for me. After several months of 
  concerted, conscious effort, I still slip and say it on oc-
  casion.

So even the author herself used the word with completely gender neutral intent, but then she insists that others can't. It's like she's looking for reasons to be offended.

That top performer category is hard to get. It's for world class people, like professional athletes, world renown artists, or Nobel Prize winners.

So, Apple wants to promote its new streaming service using musicians' music for free, and threatens to to remove them from a different platform, iTunes, if they don't comply. Still pretty bullshit.

The point about putting your full address on the letter reminds me of Microsoft Outlook's irritating habit of stripping email addresses when forwarding emails.

And here I thought it was just the stackoverflow mods that closed everything and you were supposed to take stuff like this to stackexchange.