Our 200 kyr track record of survival **cannot rule out much higher extinction probabilities **

I mean the video shows him going into an abandoned mining town they’re now using as a military training ground, not like he walked into a military base

Egg birds take 6 months from hatching to laying

this place gives you a nice area not to be judged about asking it. Everyone here is willing to help.

Lol, good info in the middle two sentences, way too much judging on either side. This guy is here to ask a question significantly more involved than “How to tie shoes”, the example in the sidebar, and you treat him like an idiot. Nice.

Depends on how accurate the map is. If possible, align minutes and seconds. Basically what you’re doing is drawing on your own longitude line.

For anyone else who stumbles across this, All longitude lines are true north lines, meaning they point to the “true” North Pole, or the top of the globe, and converge there. However magnetic north moves year by year- due to the molten core of the earth shifting and other factors. Maps will typically come with a year they’re printed, and sometimes with the declination you need to adjust by (is, 0.3deg/yr since it was printed), otherwise you need to look it up.

If you’re enjoying learning and want to put your skills to the test, check out orienteering races, or adventure races. They run across most of the world, and the shorter ones are a great way to test out your skills. I’m a huge fan of them.

In theory it’s straightforward - your meridian line would be ANY true north line. For their method to work, the map needs to indicate the longitude degrees, minutes and/or seconds across the bottom in increments. Then you basically line up the two numbers that match (ie draw a line from 86W on the top of the page to 86W on the bottom). Then that line becomes your meridian, and you create new “magnetic north” lines from there by adjusting for declination.

Civil engineer with a number of courses in building science (aka this).

Can’t tell for sure without seeing what kind of insulation it is, but there are a few factors.

First, as other people have mentioned, having temperature gradients cause moisture issues. Typically, in modern construction in cold weather climates like Canada, we install a single waterproof layer. Cold weather, this goes inside of the insulation (between the insulation and the drywall), and in hot weather places, it’ll be installed outside the insulation.

My understanding of the houses this is being done in, there is no vapour barrier, meaning damp+ moisture can accumulate.

Second, new houses in NA have a “minimum air exchange”, which is a specific amount of air that needs to move through the house within a given time frame, typically air changes per hour (ACH rating). This is usually accomplished by means of a central heating/ductwork units, and bedrooms are generally somewhere around 4-8, meaning all the air in the bedroom should be refreshed 4 to 8 times per hour. My understanding of many of these houses is that there is not central air system. Before the insulation, it is likely that small gaps or holes in the walls/exterior siding were sufficient to allow enough air to move through, however that air slows down when there is insulation sprayed into the cavities. Any slowdown will exacerbate moisture problems, as still air is bad. More air exchanges also would allow the house to dry out more, as evaporation would help.

Those are the general situations that would likely be a problem.

In this case, from reading the article, it seems like she has a hole in her roof, which is either new or was not caught by the installers. ANY source of water ingress would cause mold problems. The issue here is that previously, it is likely that the water trickled down the inside of the cladding (likely brick), and out at the base of the wall. Once you add insulation to that cavity, it’ll hold water and cause mold problems. Seems like a shitty spot to be in.

Not everyone there agrees with helmet less riding, though they do discuss the disagreement over the effectiveness of helmets for those, the stats say 1/3 of serious bike accidents involve brain injuries. That’s some huge numbers!!!

We wear helmets to do dozens of other activities for sport or leisure - ski/snowboard, skating, mountain climbing, spelunking, white water sports. Additionally, the article says those engaged in cycling for exercise or sport almost all wear helmets. Why is there such an aversion to wearing helmets while biking?

In my lifetime skiing I’ve seen an enormous change in people. When I was younger almost no one wore helmets. Now, it’s rare to see someone not wearing a helmet.

GoTransit’s Burloak Drive grade separation project would disagree, as it features a painted bike lane at level with auto traffic, despite having built an elevated sidewalk.

I said it was easy, doesnt mean its always implemented. Ive designed a handful of roads to have designated bike lanes or fully separated bike lanes. Every time we do any Active Transport, I’ve advocated for fully separated systems or physical barriers between. 90% of the time, the decision to cut them has come after resident input/discussion. Often the Townships I work with don’t have the resident/political backing to justify narrowing vehicle lanes to improve bike traffic - because that is what is required. Unfortunately we still don’t have enough public backing to push through these.

Hell, one job I’m working on is on a “designated bike route” and residents fought a separated path so much that the city scrapped it and went with the Advisory Bike Lanes.

I’m not totally convinced that the helmets are the best value here, even if money was available to grant every American citizen a helmet.

What?? Beyond cars, riding something moving ~20km/hr is still super dangerous without a helmet. Slightly off the trail and hit a tree or post? Icy conditions and you wipe out?

Even something as simple as a road speed design change (ie just changing signs without changing ANYTHING else on the road) are ~500$ a sign. As soon as you get into more complex changes, but still on the easy side (ie Advisory Bike Lanes, where the only change is painting lines to allocate specific space for bikes) run ~$15/m for each line painted. On a typical advisory lane, thats 4 lines ($60/m) plus 500$ per sharrow symbol which are spaced every 75m in each lane.

Even at an expensive helmet ($100), Helmets are by far the cheapest method of personal safety you can do. ( For example, Toronto has~5397km of roads and a population of 2.93 million. To even do a simple repainting on those roads is ~$400mil. New expensive helmets for every single person in Toronto is $293mil.

I work in civil engineering. It’s not too hard to include bike design on new roads **when they come up ** (which is only every 20yrs on average) but arguing that its more cost effective? Definitely not true.

Appendix A in the report does.

All told, their total operating revenue was 9.9bil, operating expenses were 13.1bil without including depreciation and pensions,etc which brought it to 16.1bil. that doesn’t include any improvements (capital) works or their debt servicing.

Not sure where you get that from. Most systems operate at a major loss and are propped up by grants/government funding. Typical targets for operating are ~1/3 of costs are covered by rider fares with the rest coming from grants or government funding.

Since the thread talks about NYC, I pulled this - MTA Budget. In it they state:

In a normal year, farebox revenue constitutes approximately 40 percent of the MTA’s annual budget, or $6.5 billion

EVs make a difference for anyone in an area with low density. I live in the country relatively close to population centres, but it’s impossible for me to ever imagine transit being even near me.

We will literally always have a need for small, individual vehicles of some kind for most the population. If we could reduce that to one car, then supplement with transit, where available, or carpooling? Then also make that car an EV instead of ICE? That’s a huge emissions reduction

You’re looking at the original article. This whole series of comments has been spawned off a discussion about a different case, in which the person did join the organization, then let his license lapse.

In the original, I agree. He never required a license because of their own regs( though it appears that also means he couldn’t call himself a professional engineer, so the title itself is protected, he was just exempt from needing the license to do the industrial work he was doing). He is then totally within his rights to use that knowledge and pass himself off as a subject matter expert in the same field he worked for X years, and the board just got pissy. Glad it was overturned for him.

I’ve used the system pretty regularly. To be fair, I live in a small city (150,000) within the golden horseshoe, so definitely better care compared to many throughout rural areas.

In the past few years I’ve had the birth of a child including all the various follow ups and shots, a stress test, blood work to rule out several heart issues, a halter monitor test, an ultrasound of my heart, three sets of baseline blood work, and four family doctor appointments.

The biggest fee at each was parking.

I don’t disagree we have tons of room for improvement. Our contributions each year (ie personal amount of taxes we pay for healthcare in Ontario) have not been sufficient to keep up with the growing and aging population. We desperately need greater cancer screening and diagnostic services, as prevention and early detection can save billions in future chemo/rad or operations. Rural areas and family doctors need a rework, as many people are without one due to fewer and fewer docs entering that field.

That said, I would never take the US system over Canadas. The enormous stress illness would place on a family doesn’t seem worth it for the meager tax savings, and the low wait times seem to only be avoided in the US system by paying out of pocket, which is not feasible for many.

When it comes to titles like this that are considered protected, it is actually how they work.

In your example, he isn’t allowed to use that title in the new state until he’s joined their organization (or they have an agreement with his original state)

As an extreme example for why the timing does matter, If he was licensed properly for 1 year, then let it lapse but continued to do design work as an engineer for 25 years, and then relicensed himself for one last year before retiring, the work he did during that period of being unlicensed isn’t covered, and the board of engineers would go after him for that.

For what it’s worth, there are specific provisions in the laws to allow retired people to continue using the title P.Eng with a “Retired” tag added onto it.

Interesting! Thanks for sharing that. I found a Cornell Law paper breaking down the decision and how/what things could have changed the decision (ie what things the govt is allowed to ban despite the amendment)

This is not true. I can call myself a doctor a lawyer or a cop or anything like that and it is protected speech so long as I am not attempting to perform the professional duties of that job

It actually is true, unless MN has weird rules compared to other states. I’m not a lawyer, but the code here, sec. 326.02 seems pretty clear.

or to use in connection with the person’s name, or to otherwise assume, use or advertise any title or description tending to convey the impression that the person is an architect, professional engineer (hereinafter called engineer), land surveyor, landscape architect, professional geoscientist (hereinafter called geoscientist), or certified interior designer, unless such person is qualified by licensure or certification under sections 326.02 to 326.15.

You actually can’t call yourself a professional engineer if you’re not - theres several lrgal cases where i am that are ongoing due to people calling themselves engineers while being realtors, for example, and trying to use the title to advertise (IE John Doe, P.Eng), which is not allowed.

If your argument is that you’re an expert, then you need to have the credentials you claim to have. Anyone can show the faults in a design, but he’s explicitly doing novel calculations and analysis - ie not just reviewing someone else’s work.

Now that being said, it looks like he never needed a professional license as he fell under an exemption, in which case I feel like they shot themselves in the foot. He’s got previous experience doing the same thing he’s examining - hydraulics and fluid flow analysis. Regardless of his status as “professional engineer”, his previous experience sould qualify him to testify.

Yes but during that period he didn’t have a license.

Without a doubt it’s someone on a vendetta against him, but those regulations aren’t weird, hidden ones.

If you call yourself a professional engineer, that’s a protected title and you must actually be a professional engineer. Part of being a professional engineer is paying dues to the organization in your area.

The term has been trademarked since 1995 for different uses. This isn’t anything new and there’s no signs they intend to use it aggressively. https://trademarks.justia.com/856/81/cyberpunk-85681741.html