You're welcome! I have friends in college who would've qualified for expanded Medicaid but my state didn't expand either. They were talking about this exemption which is how I learned of it.
Fashion and beauty are vehicles for self-expression very much like technology is (iOS or Android; power user or not, etc). We identify with the technology we choose every bit as much as we identify with the style we wear and the manner in which we groom ourselves. This is not limited to women (graphic tees, anyone?).
The iPhone is now available in several colors and finishes, there are tech-mirroring trends in beauty (matte finish nail polish, metallic finish makeup, etc), and wearable tech is becoming a thing. I'd say the line between tech and fashion/beauty is pretty well blurred. And technology hasn't been "ultimately utilitarian" in a long while.
So they knew she was in a bad place financially and still terminated her contract? There's not much to their response that changes this story. They didn't dispute her lack of benefits or the amount of her wages and they confirmed that she was in financial distress (so much so that the priests invited her to live in campus housing but still later the university stopped employing her).
Is the University not allowed to terminate contracts of staff "in a bad place financially"? That makes no sense. The college clearly reached out and tried to help her. The pay their adjuncts better than most and why would a part time professor teaching a class or two per semester have benefits? She was also 83 and died of cancer. This was not a 30 year old professor working full time, who couldn't afford treatment for a cold and died. It's a sad story, but the outrage seemed misplaced.
If you're looking for a replacement, I really love the Roadtrippers tool: http://roadtrippers.com
It's not a Wikipedia layer, but their data sets are interesting. There's a lot more context than the Wikipedia layer because they've organized things into categories. Their international coverage isn't as good as their US coverage, though.
Responsibility is the wrong word here. If women want certain behaviors to stop, it is logical for them to explain exactly what they don't like. Expecting already awkward men to read minds is self-defeating.
It is not logical for a woman (or anyone really) to remain in a situation that makes her uncomfortable and especially not logical to remain in a situation where she fears for her safety. Responsibility was the correct word--the onus on creepers to stop being creepers, not the women who are being creeped on or harassed to explain why that behavior is inappropriate.
Also, awkward isn't synonymous with creepy. See rosser's reply elsewhere in this thread for a better explanation of creepy: https://hackernews.hn/item?id=5975094
Of course there are many situations where simply removing yourself isn't the end of the story--coworkers, friends of friends, etc. One should be encouraged to speak up in situations where they are made to feel uncomfortable, especially considering that "creepy" itself is a subjective experience. But its not that they have a responsibility to, it's simply an effective way to communicate your wishes to another person. Expecting someone who is being creepy to just know that they're being creepy seems almost oxymoronic.
Women/people certainly CAN choose to educate. Your presumption that she SHOULD or, rather, "The proper way to handle this issue is..." is what I took issue with. There is no "proper way to handle this issue" except the way that makes the violated feel safer. If that means she moves away from the perpetrator, then that is proper way. If it means opening a dialogue about improper behavior, then that is the proper way too. Ultimately, it comes down to the woman/person in question.
I think it's because the men in the ensuing backlash put themselves in the place of the creeper and empathize with a feeling of persecution or believe the behavior to be misinterpreted by the author/experiencer. Most men won't feel intimidated or fear for their safety just by the unwanted presence of a woman, so it may be difficult for some to empathize with the opposite of this experience. Add on to this that, as humans, we judge others for their actions, but ourselves for our intent. Many men are not going to physically hurt women, and commenters that empathize with the creeper come to assessment that since they wouldn't hurt her, then she must have been over-reacting. (This fails to take into account that the woman in the situation doesn't at all know what the man she is intimidated by is going to do or what kind of harm he could cause her.) Add the stereotype of the regular nerd culture participant as being socially awkward and thus unaware of many rules regarding social interaction, and it's easy to paint a caricature of an unaware fool who was just misunderstood and is now being bullied for his awkwardness.
"Most men fear getting laughed at or humiliated by a romantic prospect while most women fear rape and death." -Gavin de Becker
I live somewhere with long yellows and it does encourage people to run the lights. It's a problem, but we are also a very bike-friendly city and long yellows give cyclists time to clear the intersection. Also, there is a delay after the red before the next right-of-way gets their green and this seems to prevent accidents (because the late-yellow/red light runners are clear before the next green).
Nevertheless, we do have some red light cameras here. One day I was stuck at an intersection with a camera, and I was waiting to turn left. I had a red left turn signal, and it suddenly stopped cycling. It was rush hour, and after three cycles with no green arrow, I called the non-emergency dispatch and told them the problem and asked the cop what I should do. She told me to take the safest course of action I thought I could. I told her that was running the red light during a break from oncoming traffic, but that I would be given a ticket for this. She said she couldn't invite me to break the law, but just do the safest thing. The legal move would have been to change lanes to the right and go straight through the intersection on a green, but this was also the most dangerous choice because of the heavy traffic flow. Thankfully the light cycle following my conversation with the cop, I got my green arrow, but it sucked to feel so helpless--knowing the safest and correct action (running the red once oncoming traffic allowed it) and knowing I would be penalized for it.
Yep. I used to call it "waking insomnia" before I learned about segmented sleep. It's likely a remnant of our ancestor's approach to sleep, which was in two parts--first and second sleep.
I'll wake 4-5 hours after first falling asleep with a period of 2-3 hours of wakefulness before I feel sleepy again. Unfortunately I'll begin to feel sleepy again within an hour or about the time I need to wake up for work. Sometimes I can catch an hour or two of sleep, but it's the hardest sleep to wake from and I feel like I'm dragging the rest of the day.
I personally just tough the day out, though sometimes I take a sleep aid (usually one 25mg dose of Benadryl) before going to bed as a preventative.
>Ammunition is still pretty hard to do well on your own.
Could you clarify this? Reloading ammo is a very popular past time among many shooting enthusiasts and not difficult at all. You do rely on manufacturers for the powder, of course. You usually buy brass and bullets separately as well. But you can cast your own bullets if you're so inclined and many reloaders use spent brass to reload (making reloaded ammo cheaper than manufactured).
I am talking about constraints on buying the power, brass, and bullets. If you wanted to make all of those things 'off the grid' as it were (like you were equipping a small army) then you show up on the radar just as clearly as you do if you're buying a lot of guns.
For black powder weapons you don't need brass, you can make your own black powder out of raw materials, and lead is pretty easy to get hold of as well.
Black powder cartridges were common stay until ~1890s and some (e.g., .45-70) were very powerful. You also technically don't even need brass: shotgun shells use plastics and (prior to that) used to use cardboard. Shot/slugs/bullets... are all easy to manufacture as well (you just need a mold and lead).
The difficult parts are:
1) Getting the mercury fulminate percussion cap. I doubt this is something that can be easily manufactured. Even if you use a readily bought one (which, I'd imagine, could easily be tracked and/or prohibited by government), it would be quite dangerous to monkey-patch it onto self-manufactured brass.
2) Non-standard brass will not feed reliably from a magazine, even if it will chamber: so any such firearm will be limited to single shot.
3) You'll still be limited to low pressure rounds: I highly doubt a home made action would withstand even a strong black-powder round like a .45-70. I don't imagine this handling anything more powerful than an old .32 S&W or a .410 shot shell. Still dangerous, but not exactly a major caliber.
"You were determined ineligible for Medicaid because your state didn’t expand eligibility for Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act."
https://www.healthcare.gov/exemptions/