It was on development branches. The threat actor was trying to delete development work.
Their main branch was already protected. I don't think it makes sense to protect every single branch in a repo? Since not all devs will have the ability to turn this off
I was given a tip to stay awake a while back: hold your breath for a little while. Apparently this well known for many years but I had never heard of it.
Seems to work, but this was in the context of driving which I do not recommend, having fallen asleep at the wheel once and woken up rally driving down some paddock.
* The steam from lava should be arising from where the lava hits the lava, boiling it--there's not going to be any steam from the interior of a lava tube, because all of the water will have boiled out long ago.
* It looks like somebody dumped a photo of a black rock field on top of a different image. There's a sploch of a normal tan-sand beach at the base of part of this cliffs; in recent lava activity, the lava will extend fully into the ocean and collapse. Given that the edge of the lava is a) pretty towering and yet b) some distance from the sea.
* The lava activity in the extreme foreground is pretty sketchy. It's not entirely implausible to have lava flowing into a pit like that in some fashion, but there's also no clear source from the lava, and real Hawaiian lava flows tend to look somewhat different than that.
* Lava flows downhill from a rift zone. Where's the rift zone here? It's basically a wall of black rock. Photogammetry is not my strong suit, but the presumably dried lava is towering above the treetops in the distance, and yet there's no clear sense of where the lava is flowing from.
* In the background, you see something more akin to a stratovolcano (actually, might well be an eroded granite dike or some other weird formation like that as opposed to a volcano in the first place). Hawaiian volcanoes are shield volcanoes, they don't look like that. Also, Kilauea and Mauna Loa are too active to really have the deeply-eroded look like that. You have to go to Kohala on the Big Island to get that kind of look.
* Kilauea is nowhere near the ocean. (Also, shield volcano, you can't see the top from the base.)
* There's another island clearly visible in the background. None of the Hawaiian islands are close enough to each other to generally be visible from one another! And certainly not from any view of Kilauea, which is the last volcano in the chain that's above sea level. (Loihi still has another 3,000 feet to go before it pokes above the surface.)
I agree that image is as fake as can be. I reported it. Nitpick though:
> None of the Hawaiian islands are close enough to each other to generally be visible from one another!
Of the Hawaiian islands usually identified as "major", Molokai, Lanai, and Kaho‘olawe are all visible from Maui, and vice versa.
Many people would probably limit the list of major islands to four. Interestingly there doesn't seem to be any official term for that grouping, other than perhaps the "main islands".
While I'm not seeing the "other island" in the background on the picture, I'll add that Maui is often visible from the northern shores of Hawaii specifically, on clear days.
Not saying this isn't fake, but erupting lava produces plenty of volatiles, including steam. These gases coming out of solution is what drives it to the surface.
There's a lot of really spammy data on Google maps that should be pretty easy for them to detect too. Go look at some remote locations and you'll find lots of images that advertise businesses, products and all sorts. Wondering if they're using it for image hosting.
The virus lies dormant in spinal and cranial ganglia for decades. If it reactivates, the immune system suppresses it, in the meantime. Past age 50-60, immunity wanes and these reactivations cannot be suppressed which allows the virus to travel back to the corresponding skin region as the spine segment to cause shingles. Presumably, after this the virus can also cross the blood brain barrier to cause neurodegeneration.
> We estimate that these laws [mandating safety seats] prevented fatalities of 57 children in car crashes in 2017 but reduced total births by 8,000 that year and have decreased the total by 145,000 since 1980.
Car seats as contraception is just a specific enumeration of the general. "busybodies as contraception" problem wherein the "has so few real problems they stop minding their business and mind other's business" classes try to force priorities on the rest of society that the rest of society can't yet afford to have. And it's not just contraception or kids. Pretty much everything in our economy gets shot in the foot by this to some extent.
Contraception is a bargain deal for any class, assuming you were not intending to have a kid.
I also question the idea that safety regulations (let's call them that) are the result of a class of people who have "so few real problems they stop minding their business and mind other's business." I get the idea, but couldn't the high cost of obstetrics and child car seat requirements be due to the wishes and decisions of people outside of this supposed class?
But babies going through car windows is bad. I don't want that. Not even just for the baby, but for me. We don't need projectile babies. Ballistic babies, if you will.
Car depend infrastructure is amazing to families. A mom can take her children to the grocery store in a car in relative safety without worrying about mentally ill homeless people on the subway.
Why would you need to get on the subway to go to the grocery store? When I lived in Paris I was within a five minute walk to at least three general grocery stores plus various speciality shops. Always plenty of parents all around. This is not uncommon in properly designed non-car dependent cities. Not to mention deliveries are just that much easier and all without a car.
Surely the priority should be to help those with mental issues and those without homes? It's bizarre to want to live in a society that prioritises car use so that people don't have to see those discarded by the same society.
It's pure facts. I used to live in a city where me and my wife were terrorized by homeless people on the light rail. Now we live far away from public transportation and no longer have to worry about the safety of ourselves or our children and our neighbors are fantastic people.
Car dependency and castle doctrine is essential in a low trust society with a legal system that puts violent offenders right back on the street.
Moving in a private vehicle is statistically the most dangerous activity an otherwise healthy young person routinely participates in. Your family is almost certainly at higher risk of death and serious injury now because you based this decision on your perception of safety rather than evaluating the reality of it. Speaking of "pure facts."
Right, except it wasn't, like objectively. Like factually. As in its not up to your opinion.
Driving is more dangerous, and it's not even close. For example, in NYC you're over 100x more likely to die in a car on the roads above the subway than on the subway.
I actually thought about including this in the piece (and how car sizes become a problem once you hit 4+ kids) but decided to keep it more focused on just the healthcare costs
It touches all the emotions and experiences, somehow being relatable to adults and kids at the same time. Its deepness and universality probably won't be apparent unless you read many of them - preferably the best, maybe one a day.
