I guess it vaguely looks like this one in terms of the large flat plane in the front. Though it's blade runner, so it's all grungy like pieces are falling off and it's all rusted and junk. Wait maybe cyber truck was inspired by bladeunner.
Doesn't look much like a lot of other cars in the movie though.
Well there are evaporator fans in modern refrigerators in the US. They serve an important role though helping with defrosting, improving cooling efficiency, and evenness of cooling throughout the fridge.
https://refrigeratorguide.net/maximize-cooling-efficiency-best-refrigerator-evaporator/
Usually only very small refrigerators are without them now.
It is another point of failure though, but should be pretty easily repairable. I mean it'll still be able to cool without the fan, but it'll be running much more to try and compensate and keep things cool though.
If you know the YouTube channel technology connections, here's a fun video of him messing around with a fanless style refrigerator:
Will use 4x as much electricity though, ugh.
https://www.cleanenergyresourceteams.org/your-old-refrigerator-energy-hog
Anyone know of any refrigerators today that are as durable as older ones and have today's efficiencies, but without the smart features and other junk?
Average refrigerator today still lasts 13 years though, and while they're made cheaply they also are cheaper (at least as a portion percentage of the average paycheck).
https://reviewed.usatoday.com/dishwashers/features/ask-the-experts-why-dont-new-home-appliances-last
Only catch is Republicans probably launching some type of legal action to try and stop it.
No lawsuit launched yet to my knowledge, just sternly worded letters saying please stop helping taxpayers instead of letting predatory companies like Intuit fleece money off of them.
I would expect them to try something soon though with this announced.
They are now legal to grow in many states. Unfortunately still not going to find it in a grocery store most likely. I grow my own in the backyard so I can have some at least part of the year. They're perennial, very easy to grow, and produce a ton of berries. Gooseberries were banned for similar reasons, but are now also legal in many states.
There are definitely pros and cons with both systems. It can be brutal for someone who was listed as a health care proxy but the patient never expressed their wishes to them. Can't agree more about having those conversations with loved ones even if you're healthy, you never really know, and it'll make the decisions so much easier on your loved ones when they know they're doing what you would have wanted.
Technically doctors are not required to offer futile care in the US even if the health care proxy wants it, but courts have sometimes inserted themselves into that which makes it complicated. Luckily those cases are rare, usually through education and meeting with all family members most come to agreements about what their relative would want and move forward.
I'm sorry you went through all of that, it sounds terrible.
For anyone reading from the US, the system is a little different there. Treatment decisions would default to a health care proxy if a person is not competent (and like this poster said, that means unable to understand, ask questions, and articulate choices, not making bad choices). A health care proxy is different from power of attorney (in the US), check your state for forms to pick one. It's always a good idea to have one declared and paperwork with your doctor, however if you don't have one selected on paper, then default health care proxy is closest relative (spouse, then adult kids, then parents, then siblings, usually). If no health care proxy can be found, only then would the court system get involved and appoint a guardian.
In regards to the original posters question, involuntary commitment for a mental health issue may involve a competency determination, but is much more involved and needs to involve courts very quickly. In general only a 72 hour hold can be placed by a doctor without a court getting involved. It's less common too, most people in inpatient mental health situations are in voluntary stays.
In addition to the ED which is always available if needed as a last resort, check your local area for mental health crisis lines and support. These are often a local group such as through a county and may be affiliated with mental health providers, can often even make home visits and quickly connect people with resources and advice on how to go forward.
From the applications section of the Wikipedia article on quantum entanglement:
Entanglement has many applications in quantum information theory. With the aid of entanglement, otherwise impossible tasks may be achieved.
Among the best-known applications of entanglement are superdense coding and quantum teleportation.[85]
Most researchers believe that entanglement is necessary to realize quantum computing (although this is disputed by some).[86]
Entanglement is used in some protocols of quantum cryptography,[87][88] but to prove the security of quantum key distribution (QKD) under standard assumptions does not require entanglement.[89] However, the device independent security of QKD is shown exploiting entanglement between the communication partners.[90]
A lot of Sci Fi and other popular media likes to misconstrue quantum entanglement as allowing for faster than light communication so that they can have faster than light communication in their story, often for narrative purposes to make their galaxy spanning epic possible on a human time scale. But as far as we know, faster than light communication is impossible. It doesn't mean quantum entanglement is useless or not an important scientific finding though.
This is just chat gpt rephrasing the comment above me. Don't worry though, when chat gpt is wrong it's quite confident sounding and even cites sources that don't exist but look quite convincing!
Hold on let me have chat gpt rephrase that for you.
I'm not exactly sure of the source, but there was a statement suggesting that language models offer three kinds of responses: ones that are too general to be of any value, those that essentially mimic existing content in a slightly altered form, and assertions that are completely incorrect yet presented with unwavering certainty. I might be paraphrasing inaccurately, but that was the essence.
This is bizarre, I looked and Rochester Minnesota has multiple high speed providers, including two that offer fiber.
And the isp you have is a wireless isp that doesn't even list Rochester as within its coverage area, they're intended to serve more rural areas west of the city. On their map it gets close to but not quite in Rochester, but maybe they're still able to access it (slowly) since it's a wireless provider.
I'm guessing this is a whoever owns your Airbnb problem rather than a Rochester Minnesota problem. I don't understand why they would be paying for this rather than use any of the readily available high speed options there.
The president already was protected from all civil lawsuits due to previous rulings. This ruling was only about criminal prosecutions.
He has absolute immunity for any use, for any reason, of his core presidential powers include anything listed in article 2 (the military, pardons, firing or hiring officials within the executive department). There is no determining if those are an official act or not. Anything the president does with an article 2 power is an official act with absolute immunity now. Motives or reason for using that power or the outcome of that cannot be questioned. It is legal for the president to accept a bribe to pardon someone right now. The fact that it happened couldn't even be mentioned in court.
Only when the president is doing something not listed in the constitution can it be determined if it's an official or unofficial act by the courts and should be immune. And again it's the action, not the motive or the result or purpose of the action, that determines whether it is official. The only example they gave was talking to justice department officials is official. So if he is talking to justice department officials to arrange a bribe or plan a coup? Legal, immune, can't even be used as evidence against him. It doesn't matter why he was talking to the justice department, the fact that he was makes him immune from any laws he breaks in the process of doing so. They aren't determining if a bribe or coup is an official act, they're determining if talking to justice department officials in general is. It doesn't matter what he's actually doing it for, arranging a coup? That's perfectly okay. Oh someone found out, pardon everyone else involved in the conspiracy who wasn't already immune. Now it can't even be brought up in court.
In the example you gave of ordering an assassination, if it used the military to do the assassination that is a core power, cannot be questioned. The supreme court ruling placed no limits on what can be done with his article 2 powers. Only a nebulous official vs not official test for things not listed in article 2. There's also a very worrying core power in article 2 about "ensuring laws are faithfully executed" that even Barrett thought was too much in her concurrence as it could apply to seemingly anything. Basically, as long as the president is using the levers of government to commit crimes, legal now.
Impeachment is the only recourse now as you say, but even if impeached and removed from office by some miracle, they still wouldn't be able to be held criminally liable afterwards for that.
Everyone panicking in this thread is right to do so.