There's the funny case of "someone will save money by providing this to you", which is sometimes the case for e.g. making public toilets free.
> rarely controllable towards a specific change (technological progress).
What about invention of hormonal birth control?
legal aspects of suicide
> The German court example intrigues me – I would definitely consider it major and I wonder how it happened. Do you know more about the story?
See https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2020/02/rs20200226_2bvr234715en.html;jsessionid=180FE6377D3107753F22B95A5BB4752D.2_cid377 for a reference to the actual decision. That also implies that it's a result of complaints about unconstitutionality raised by people wishing to die, organisations that wish to enable that, doctors that wish to enable that, and lawyers that wish to enable that (all of them alleging that the criminalization violates some sort of constitutionally-guaranteed right they have).
Btw. I'm guessing that complainant III.1 is Dignitas.
@timorl Also, changes caused by a single event (e.g. any of the changes that happened in US as a direct result of attacks on WTC), changes that happened as a result of technology becoming available (easing of travel and long-distance communications come to mind as the technologies most likely to be implicated), and changes that were caused by some combination of environmental effects (e.g. migration from countryside to cities; or popularization of the concept of factory worker, which as you know caused e.g. the dowry-caused constraints on marriage to become less important).
I think that most coup d'etats weren't. Also surrendering or suing for peace does often cause major changes (v. Japan after WWII) and is rarely preceded by protests (which would typically be considered treason).
I expect that looking for edge cases in the meaning of "preceded" (I expect manifestations in support to sometimes start after the event that caused the change to be inevitable) and "major" (e.g. a German court has recently ruled that being able to cause oneself to die is a constitutionally-guaranteed right -- is that major?) might yield more examples.
@freemo I don't remember a single time I was in theater and the spectacle did _not_ have intermission.
@freemo Many cinemas in Switzerland still insert an intermission into movies (which is delightfully discordian -- it confuses the heck out of people who have no clue why the movie is stopped in the ~middle).
@freemo Similarly to @Cosmic I'm confused by some triples. The one most obviously weird to me is the one that implies that diligence is opposite of laziness: I can very easily imagine a lazy (doesn't want to do work) but diligent (only does work in a very correct fashion) person: in fact, I think that a lazy diligent person appears more lazy by virtue of being diligent.
@freemo From very atypical things: Maybe "47 Ronin" (from 1941)?
2533. Slope Hypothesis Testing
title text: "What? I can't hear--" "What? I said, are you sure--" "CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK--"
(https://xkcd.com/2533)
(https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2533
)
@freemo @lucifargundam @trinsec Aren't you looking for an MSDS repository? They sometimes describe what other substances can be produced in normal conditions, in interactions with things one expects the thing to possibly come in contact with.
@kornel Can we easily get the same graph weighted by usage stats (e.g. either number of crates depending on it) or limited to creates that had their first version more than, say, 6 months ago?
I expect with no evidence that a large part of the crates that depend on a new(ish) compiler version are ones that are also very new and virtually unused.
@freemo So, anything made from a plant is a vegetable? Beer? Vodka? Wooden wall?
@freemo @zpartacoos @Electronics What control does BMS have? I thought the parallel connection of series strings setup had the parallel connection made just with a wire. Did you envision something different?
@freemo @zpartacoos @Electronics
> as if you had connected the negative and positive terminals of the adjacent batteries with a wire.
Yes. Which means that we now have strings with different cell counts connected in parallel, right?
@freemo @zpartacoos @Electronics Wouldn't a short of a cell cause the string that's now one short to start being charged by the still-complete string at some very high current?
Well, I guess it's strictly better than the other arrangement, where some cells would be simply shorted.
I agree that _if_ the GUI shell they intend to use pans out (and it's not simply Android with Termux) it's a significant thing, in particular if it makes it easy to automatically interact with Android apps. However, I am somewhat doubtful that it does, mostly because doing such a thing well is pretty expensive. You can try emulating Android using something like Anbox, and need to ensure that your emulation is good enough, and possibly have some issues with graphics acceleration; you can try to have your OS be a modified Android, and then you'll most certainly create security issues and will have to make an abomination out of Android to make it seem at least somewhat usable as an end-user Linux distro; last you can just use Android and run Linux userland in an app -- just like Termux. I expect the third thing to have the largest expected usability, and it's something you can get on ~any Android tablet.
@freemo You might wish to take a look at PineTab (https://www.pine64.org/pinetab/) too. It's way less powerful (CPU-wise and memorywise); I have no clue about battery life; there's 2~3 different GUI shells that work better or worse on it.
A series connection of parallel cells would be prefered over a parallel connection of series cells. The reason being that the control circuitry on a balancing battery management system is much simpler. The downside is that if a battery goes int he form of a short (which is how these things die a lot of times) it will take its parallel buddy with it. So simplicity has its draw backs too but int he end simplicity ultimately wins out.
@freemo @zpartacoos @Electronics
Do you know why a parallel connection of series connected cells might be preferred over a series connection of parallel connected cells?
I enjoy things around information theory (and data compression), complexity theory (and cryptography), read hard scifi, currently work on weird ML (we'll see how it goes), am somewhat literal minded and have approximate knowledge of random things. I like when statements have truth values, and when things can be described simply (which is not exactly the same as shortly) and yet have interesting properties.
I live in the largest city of Switzerland (and yet have cow and sheep pastures and a swimmable lake within a few hundred meters of my place :)). I speak Polish, English, German, and can understand simple Swiss German and French.
If in doubt, please err on the side of being direct with me. I very much appreciate when people tell me that I'm being inaccurate. I think that satisfying people's curiosity is the most important thing I could be doing (and usually enjoy doing it). I am normally terse in my writing and would appreciate requests to verbosify.
I appreciate it if my grammar or style is corrected (in any of the languages I use here).