Not quite twice as likely, but that’s OK, Trump is working hard on getting it even higher.

Say what you want about Hitler, but at least he killed Hitler.

You are absolutely right, I completely forgot that she claimed to have bought them in an “Asian market” that she couldn’t remember where was, and she must have paid cash.
And that she had erased her phone for some reason.

Good catch. 👍

The Christian way of “helping”.

This is the best article I’ve read on this story yet.
It quickly becomes very obvious that she killed those 3 people, where the only remaining question is whether she did it on purpose.
But the matter with the very obviously different colored plate, is very damaging to her.
And then the matter of throwing out a mushroom dryer that has traces of the toxin. A dryer she claimed she had never owned!
And the fact that she had used a website warning against the Death cap at certain sites.
And the fact that she had visited exactly those sites.
Giving children chocolate with dried mushroom in it, and remarking they didn’t even notice!
Her story about throwing up after the guests left, but she still went to the hospital a couple of days later claiming she felt ill, but there was no trace of the toxin in her blood. That does not ring true either.
The invitation itself was considered a bit strange too, since it was not something she usually did.
And the fact that she had been suspected of trying to kill her husband before, does not help.

Seems to me the police did good work here, maybe because she had been suspected before? And the evidence against her is pretty overwhelming that these killings were intentional.

The article later goes on to talk about how he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life by a judge.

Sorry, I skimmed the article earlier and missed that, but now I see it.

I’m not sure what your point is? You state according to the prosecutor, when I just stated that a sentence is not normally according to a prosecutor, but an actual court decision!
The headline clearly indicates that he actually got life in prison, as he was sentenced by the court. But completely fails to mention the actual judgement by the court?
The prosecutor is not responsible for announcing sentencing, but the prosecutor is the only source stated.
Repeating what the prosecutor stated once again does not help.

I know that, that’s common knowledge.
But if the research shows anything that’s statistically significant, it would show a level of benefit.
To say that it could as in hypothetically, implies the research didn’t really show anything one way or the other.
You could say the same of homeopathic medicine. It could be a benefit, except nothing has ever shown it to be.
Personally I’m pretty sure owning a pet like a dog or a cat is indeed beneficial, so I find it disappointing if this is not shown in research.
I believe there has been studies made that show lower rate of heart conditions among pet owners. There is also a sort of consensus that it helps psychologically for instandce against depression.
So it’s not a long stretch to think it “could” help brain functions in other ways too.
It’s just disappointing that according to the headline, the study failed to show that. Which made me not care to read it.

It was so obviously stupid back then, that only people too young to remember don’t know this.
Trump had no reason to tear up that agreement, he did it because it was an agreement Obama had made, and Trump was hellbent on reversing everything Obama did out of spite and nothing else.

This is physics 101, warm air can hold more water at the same relative humidity. When air is warmed it collects humidity, and when the humidity condenses to water, it cools, and the cascading effect is bigger proportionally to the increased level of water in the air.

Even I figured that out more than 10 years ago, without being a climate scientist, but based on basic physics.
And in my country, we’ve also been seeing it clearly for some years now, and most regions are expanding sewage systems to be able to handle it.

But of course climate change deniers probably couldn’t figure such things out, and need it explained as you would to a child.

life sentence for plotting to attack FBI agents and seeking to incite a “civil war,” according to prosecutors.

???

Usually a sentence is not according to a prosecutor, but a court decision by a judge.
So which is it?

OK but so could a fidget spinner or an air fryer.
The question is if it does or not, not if it “could”.

they are definitely not doing everything they can to increase their conversion rate.

Oh you mean like prompting users to buy extra services all the time?
Yes they are actually doing exactly that.

Cost of living matters too.

Of course it does, the article also mention that, did you even read the article?

WTF?
The article even state this fact as a barrier to attract scientists to Europe from USA.
But here you go:

https://www.coursera.org/articles/research-scientist-salary?campaignid=20858198824&adgroupid=&device=c&keyword=&matchtype=&network=x&devicemodel=&creativeid=&assetgroupid=6490027433&targetid=&extensionid=&placement=&gad_campaignid=20854471652

Lyft: $175,144
Flexport: $174,532
Meta: $171,477
Netflix: $168,720
StubHub: $167,700
Google: $167,427
DoorDash: $166,792
eBay: $166,231
Waymo: $163,156
NVIDIA: $162,497   

Everybody who has followed this issue even superficially knows this!!
Universities in USA also pay more, because they are very commercially oriented, and American universities compete on prestige, and they have more money than other universities around the world.

Try to look it up, and find info to the contrary if you don’t believe it. This is freaking common knowledge!

Of course I do, but ChatGPT still has a free option. And the basis to compare paid subscriptions when there is also a free option stand IMO.
Without a good free option, how would it be only 5% who pay? It’s exactly the same as with Youtube in that regard.

The free option is a form of advertising and allowing people to get to know the service. With Youtube the free option isn’t really free, you pay by allowing advertising.
So by that comparison Youtube is actually the worse free option of the two. And despite that more people pay for ChatGPT.
So your argument that they are not the same, actually makes ChatGPT numbers even more impressive not less.

That’s what we thought last time under Trump. But it turned out most scientists go for the higher wages and budgets in USA.

Are you sure that’s still true

Yes.
A lot of the highest paying research is corporate. And despite the shit Trump is doing, the wages are still higher at for instance universities too.

I have no idea how you can even doubt that, despite Trump is targeting everything that might be humane or to save the earth. Everything that has potential profits will probably receive more. Because USA has become very unattractive in many ways.

Absolutely free healthcare and education are big parts of doing more with less, and quality of life.
But it’s also easier to buy a house or apartment, and quality food is cheaper, and paid holidays and on and on.
We have so many privileges Americans don’t have it’s crazy.

Lower wages and lower research budgets in Europe are very tangible problems.
The reason USA attract so many high level scientists and researchers, is that they throw more money at it.

Despite that, I’m sure most researchers will find that you can do more with less here in Europe, both on research and with your private economy. And quality of life seems to me to be miles ahead compared to USA.