The sunk cost fallacy is a very easy way to get stuck being miserable.

Sometimes a drastic change might be painful at the time but will be much better for you overall.

Ah nice to see Red Bull continuing their tradition of managing their drivers in the shitiest ways.

Yeah but does anyone call them that? I’d still call that kind of fine cut a paper cut.

Never heard anyone say “ow I’ve got a cardboard cut”

Are the cuts from packaging different then?

Never heard of cardboard cuts…

There’s a word missing. Should read “each sober person would have to fight off over 3 million penguins”.

My understanding is that current atomic clocks work on changing the state of whole atoms.

Whereas this new method changes the state of part of the nucleus of an atom.

Basically smaller is more precise. However given that current atomic clocks are one second out over something like a billion years I’ve no idea what benefit this extra preciseness will give us.

We’ll probably start noticing really weird shit when we look at time that precisely. That’s generally what’s happened when we get into the quantum scale of things.

I could be wrong but I seem to remember this is one of the reasons why the baskets have a net.

You’re not allowed to do that but if the net wasn’t there then in pre-video games the refs might not be able to spot if the ball went up through the hoop.

Think they were also to stop players reaching up through the hoop to defend as well.

So you know brioche buns should be ever so slightly sticky, but a sweet sticky, right?

Not to ruin your favourite burger place but maybe you should just buy some buns from a bakers and then see what they’re like fresh.

At the moment there are two options. You can’t quite tell the difference between brioche sticky and greasy sticky or your burger place manages to get grease all over your buns.

How good are they overall? Do you want to know the answer?

Edit: Damn it came to me just too late. At the moment you’re stuck in Heisenberg’s buns. Do you want to resolve that?

Did you read the recall? Again it says hood latch switch deformation.

That may be part of the hood latch assembly but again at no point does it say that the latch not latching is the issue. Only the reporting of the latching state.

You’re really rather pathetic and I’m certainly no fan of Tesla or Musk. A brief check of my previous posts would confirm this.

As you’re obviously not very good at reading or understanding things then that fact probably did slip by you. You seem to be only capable of latching (you might not see what I did there being a bit dense) onto certain words without understanding the full issue.

Nope it’s the latch switch. So something that is switched when the latch is closed. Not the latch itself.

Read it again. It’s deformation of the hood latch switch. Not the hood latch.

Thanks for further confirming my point that you’re not reading it correctly

And what is the next word after the bit you have quoted?

Is it by any chance switch.

The full quote is deformation of the hood latch switch. Not the hood latch.

Thanks for further confirming my point that you’re not reading it correctly.

The comments read like a lot of people don’t quite understand the issue.

The bonnet (hood if you insist) latch may not warn a driver if it isn’t secured correctly. If it is secured correctly then it is fine. So it isn’t going to suddenly open.

If the latch isn’t shut correctly and then the sensor doesn’t report this then the bonnet may open unexpectedly.

If they can use a software update to correct the reporting then that’s it fixed.

There’s no issue with the actual latching mechanism. It’s just the sensor for reporting the latching state.

It may be that it currently works on a two value system. i.e a value for correctly latched and a value for not latched. If that’s the case and isn’t just not providing the second valve correctly then a simple software change to only use the latched value would fix this. As any other value or the absence of a value will report it at unlatched.

His parents were a GP and owned a pharmacy. They just didn’t get it for him/them for whatever reason.

They certainly could have afforded it if they wanted to.

There’s a massive difference between just not having something as a child and not even being able to afford it at all.

I love these Tory twat stories where they try to relate to normal people. They’re so far off the mark it highlights just how clueless they are about real life.

Oh my god that’s awful.

Nearly as bad as an agency that does that to their own people and that of another nation.

Not seeing a lot of similar articles about Shin Bet though. Wonder why…

Thou shalt spell the word “Pheonix” P-H-E-O-N-I-X, not P-H-O-E-N-I-X, regardless of what the Oxford English Dictionary tells you.