I'm curious, where are you getting your em dashes from?
My US 101 keyboard layout doesn't have it, do euro keyboard layouts with alt-gr have it relatively easily accessible? Presumably there's an alt+numpad combo, but that seems to be something that would interrupt the flow of typing quite a bit.
I've just discovered that if I go into the numeric/character section of my phone keyboard and long press the -, I can get —, but that's a long-winded way of getting them.
From the article:
First, generative AI. I haven’t seen any hard evidence that chatbots, in practice, use more em dashes than anyone else.
Ok, look. I don't have an em dash button on my keyboard. I do have a hyphen button. If I want an em dash in my writing, I have to go and hunt for one, or I use Word, which loooves to swap in those em dashes even when I just want a hyphen. I ain't gonna pump my text through Word when I'm just hammering out a reply to someone online.
So that's the big clue here that I think the author is missing. Posts like mine right here - that I'm swiping out on Gboard right now on my phone - they're not going to have em dashes.
Posts generated by AI bots, who've been trained on a corpus chock full of em dashes because of Word and other helpful typesetting software, they're much more likely to have them, along with bullet points, neat summarising conclusions, and that blandness you only get when you ingest a trillion properly formatted documents to statistically regurgitate later.
Cs-137 is used in industrial density gauges. You want to measure the density of a liquid in a pipe? A radioactive source on one side, a detector on the other, easy-peasy.
Now how the fuck a controlled substance escapes from its highly encapsulated and supposedly-well-tested-and-regularly-inspected compartment and gets into your food, well that's something else to ponder.
The smaller end is RJ12, the bigger end is RJ45.
The question is, what are you trying to do with it? RJ12 is/was typically used for telephone connections, RJ45 for Ethernet. Generally speaking, they don't mix.
If your plan is to connect a computer to a RJ12 socket on the wall, that's not going to work. If you've been told the socket on the wall is "the internet", you're likely going to need a modem in between that socket and your computer.
If you want to recharge a full 300-mile Li-Ion battery in 5 minutes, you need to supply 1200 kW (1.2 MW) of power.
Which is why cloning the traditional centralised ICE refuelling station concept doesn't work with EVs.
The United States struggles with 4.8 kW home chargers and 150 kW superchargers.
With an average daily usage of 20kWh for a 60 mile commute in a mix of stop and go and highway traffic, a 4.8 kW charger can top off your EV battery at home in 4 hours. A 2kW charger can do it in 10 hours.
That's the mindset that needs to change. You shouldn't have to visit an external charging station every few days to cram another 100kWh of power into your battery. You put a charge into your battery at home every night. It's fully charged again every morning for your commute. The mega charging stations are then only used for long distance travel.
So, just like we built ICE refuelling stations dotted all over the place, we need to put in the infrastructure for localised EV charging at homes. Colder climates have the advantage already, as parking lots are already full of engine block heater connections and in a lot of euro countries they're used for EV charging. It can be done, it's just a change.
Waiting patiently for the arrival of my pebble time 2 with its moderate array of features and its 21+ day battery life.
Perhaps you could quote the part where they specify what the leak was and how much?
Then you need to read the article again. I'm not going to quote the part where they specifically say what part failed and what tank it was attached to, which should give you a very big clue as to whether it was methane or LOX.
Unfortunately, the *precise *volume in cubic metres wasn't specified. The effect that it had on the nosecone and temperatures of various sensors in the nosecone was mentioned, which implies it was more than just a trivial leak. The loss of the ship also implies that.
edit: Oof my instance is slow today, multiple duplicated comments deleted.
Perhaps if you had read just a little further into the article you would have discovered the answers to your questions that were presented there.
That's better, but it's still a mystery. Cs-137 sources should be rigorously stored, even in density gauges they are permanently inside a capsule with a shutter that turns the beam "on and off". It's not like you have a chunk of Cs-137 rattling around in a drawer somewhere (or worse, somehow in powered form that gets all over the inside of a shipping container) but that sounds like that's been the case here.
It's not the first time one of these sources has come loose though - there was a capsule lost on 1400km of highway in Western Australia a little while ago.