Oh gee, wow… burn off when it’s not summer. Amazing science. We better tell these university dumb dumbs.
I’m curious how they managed to achieve a mosaic pattern with no fire breaks or water or anything really to control where the fire burns.
If you believe any of that I can’t help you mate.
No I’ve never bowsed imgur but I made the mistake of uploading a photo of my wife holding a chicken so I could post it to a back yard chicken forum, and the comments were enough to ensure I never posted anything there again.
Basically an unmoderated cess pool.
LOL.
Plenty of houses in Australia have been burned which are not in “disaster” zones. Every property has a bushfire rating which determines required mitigation. Its a genuine risk in many suburbs.
Also, that’s exactly what confirmation bias means. In making an assertion that ecosystems evolved to depend on regular burning, you’re ignoring all the species which became extinct in prehistory due to regular burning.
The type of land managment practices in use in 18th century Australia are about as useful as the farming practices from that era.
Any suggestion that we should disregard the last 100 years of land management science, in favor if lighting up the nearest bush every other month, is just as absurd as it sounds.
I don’t think this is really as settled or clear as you’re making out.
The cold or cool fire you’re talking about just means they burn every year, there’s less fuel load so the fire burns out before larger trees have time to burn.
Traditionally they weren’t doing this out of care for the land, it just makes hunting far easier - kangaroos like to eat the new shoots after a fire, and it’s easier to chase / throw things at them if there’s thinner underbrush.
Land management organisations have been making informed decisions about controlled burns since forever. They consider all the factors, like fuel load, weather, risks to property, and input from community groups including indigenous Australians.
It’s controversial because these controlled burns often become uncontrolled fires.
Things have changed since this type of land management was a thing. Notably people have houses now which they prefer not to be burned down.
Finally:
many plants have evolved to require fire as part of their life cycle.
This is confirmation bias. What happened to the plant species that were vulnerable to fire?
imgur is a swamp
It depends on the software / configuration / script.
In any sane set up, if the user fails to navigate the menu n times you get dumped to an operator. 0 or * or # aren’t special hacks, you just need invalid navigation.
I imagine what you have noticed is that increasingly there just isn’t an operator to talk to, or at least the org you’re calling really doesnt want to talk to you, so this kind of navigation failure just dumps you back to the start or something.
No son of mine is going to marry a chat bot!
I had a call from a scammer using a chat bot or voice generator?
Weirdly I was sure I could hear someone typing. I mean it would be trivial to set things up so the victim couldn’t hear that.
Regardless, it just didn’t sound like a human. I mean it was good but it was definitely in the uncanny valley.
Weirdly, it was obviously intended for victims to think it was human, but then at the end it said “I’m just going to transfer you to a human operator now”, and hung up.
I usually just press star or hash on the number pad a bunch of times
Pathetic. What at embarrassment. Go paint something gold, fuckwits.
Its also extracting resources, water and power and land, and sending the value to some multinational who isn’t going to return it to the local economy.
I think a bunch of people may have naively assumed it was a new local industry like a power station or factory.
Yep. Personally my first choice is the t490. Theres so many in great condition.
I like to imagine the IT debt in some office building buying and hording t490s just to be sure they don’t lose their budget next year.
Paradoxically, the paradox of tolerance is most often cited in the course of branding someone as “intolerant” and thereby excusing your intolerance of them.
Its a problem of semantics. Who really is sufficiently intolerant to be intolerable?
I don’t think you really understand my point ?
If you created some feature for libreoffice why would microsoft want to steal your code for office? They could just write their own code which would obviously be a better fit for their code base.
You’ve kind of blown my mind with this.
I think there’s a number of different perspectives that can explain conservatism but this model can explain a lot of behavior.
In particular this part:
Everything that they consider normal and typical from their own limited experience should be the default
You’re conflating the theft of code used to train models with the theft of a business brand.
Yes, of course they’re using your code to train their models. That use is in their terms and their licensing.
No, of course they don’t steal businesses. However, they do acquire them or destroy them or undermine them, as is long standing tradition.
I don’t understand your point though? As in, how can anyone feel secure using their platform.
Code isn’t sacred cleverness that contains the value of a business. Being able to read the code doesn’t allow one to steal the value of that business. The value is in the brand, the domain, and the userbase.
The basic truth conservatives can’t concede is that we are all better off when we are all better off.
If looking down on someone makes you feel better about yourself, then you want to hold people down so you have someone to look down on.
That’s not really Microsoft’s business.
They sell picks and shovels. If they just stole someone’s mine everyone would stop buying their picks and shovels.
Its not “natural selection” when people are lighting fires and destroying the native flora and fauna.
Indigenous fire “science” is just like natural “medicine” - any that can withstand scrutiny is just “fire science”.
One of us sure doesnt.