Mites are almost certainly a made-up or artificial taxon according to recent phylogenetic analyses. For the past century, the hypothesis that mites represent a natural taxon (i.e. a single lineage) was heavily based on a misunderstanding that their mouthpart region was modified into what is termed a “gnathosoma.” This line of reasoning is circular: Mites have been treated as a proper taxon because of the gnathosoma; the gnathosoma has been treated as a proper character because of mites. (Image courtesy of Samuel Bolton, Ph.D.)
A ‘Trump Card Visa’ Is Already Showing Up in Immigration Forms
Donald Trump has proposed launching a “gold card” program offering US residency for $5 million. Elon Musk’s DOGE has begun rolling out the technology to enable it.
"[W]here I give someone (against their will) reliable information about themselves or their condition which is relevant to decisions they must make I may violate a liberty they assert but I do not violate their autonomy, for the information I give them is necessary for their autonomous decision making. (Harris and Keywood 2001, page 419"
@silvermouse said:
A ‘Trump Card Visa’ Is Already Showing Up in Immigration Forms
Donald Trump has proposed launching a “gold card” program offering US residency for $5 million. Elon Musk’s DOGE has begun rolling out the technology to enable it.
They have just upped the ante, there are untold millions of Chinese nationals that bought green cards for $1 million in the past several years. I'm not singling out Chinese, I have a friend that this has been his business model for the last 8-10 years, seeking Chinese investors in exchange for green cards. He controls several hundred million in investment capital.
"We live in a paradoxical time: despite the proliferation of critical thinking courses in schools and universities, our public discourse has never been more dominated by inflexible certainties, tribal allegiances to dubious ‘facts’, and a profound aversion to questioning our own beliefs. In an age where certainty is currency, doubt has become a radical act.
"Our social media ecosystems reward conviction, not contemplation. Politicians trumpet certainties rather than explore complexities. Even our educational institutions often teach critical thinking as a weapon to dismantle others’ arguments rather than a tool for examining our own. The skill we most desperately need is the very one we’ve neglected to cultivate: the ability to hold our own certainties in suspension."
More here: https://psyche.co/ideas/these-lessons-in-scepticism-could-make-the-world-a-better-place
For years, North Korea has been secretly placing young IT workers inside Western companies. With AI, their schemes are now more devious—and effective—than ever.
I, for one, am glad it has, and I hope he gets into the Hall.
I pretty firmly disagree. If he was in fact only betting on his own team to win (which there's no way to prove, how do we know he wasn't taking them against the spread, or god forbid betting against them), then he's still impacting the integrity of the game. He can do things such as saving his best reliever for the next game, where he could have already bet what is called a look-ahead line. He can overextend a pitcher in a game that he has extra money on. He can know whether a promising young player is or isn't getting called up from the minor leagues. It's a cardinal sin for a reason, and I think that permanent lifetime ban from ever playing or being associated with the game in any way is an important thing for every future player or employee to have in the back of their mind, should they get approached by someone telling them to fake an injury, or tamper with the baseballs, or something like that.
I think it reflects on the general acceptance of gambling in our society. When I was a kid gambling was something done in the dark, I still feel guilty about winning 5 cents on the 69 Mets. Nobody gambled for a living unless you were a mobster. That said, Calvin's concerns are totally legitimate but I think when a guy is dead we can probably quit kicking dirt on him.
Especially considering that the taboo that was sports betting is now at the forefront of every broadcast. As Frank said last night, they were “lifetime” bans. Lifetime is over when you’re dead. It still doesn’t mean any of them will get into the Hall of Fame.
Me personally, I feel that the hypocrisy is beyond ridiculous. The different sports entities have all embraced gambling and are making fortunes off of it. Seems like every segment is brought to you by one of the gambling sites. All of the sports shows have devoted entire blocks of programming towards it. Are players receiving part of that revenue? If not, they should be because it is revenue derived directly from their actions. It’s no different than jersey sales. Then you have the networks that have always chastised athletes for gambling. Yet they also devote segment to sports betting. I understand rules are rules…and I agree. But the hypocrisy is just as bad as the crime.
Frank pointed out on vHerf that the announcement is redundant since if it's a lifetime ban that means the ban is over with or without the announcement.
I think it's just a ploy to get people talking about a boring sport.
Join us on Zoom vHerf (Meeting # 2619860114 Password vHerf2020 )
Is it just me, or are some of you picturing @CalvinAndHobo with a fedora, pin-striped suit with a carnation on the lapel, pointy toed shoes and a briefcase handcuffed to his wrist?
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
I, for one, am glad it has, and I hope he gets into the Hall.
I pretty firmly disagree. If he was in fact only betting on his own team to win (which there's no way to prove, how do we know he wasn't taking them against the spread, or god forbid betting against them), then he's still impacting the integrity of the game. He can do things such as saving his best reliever for the next game, where he could have already bet what is called a look-ahead line. He can overextend a pitcher in a game that he has extra money on. He can know whether a promising young player is or isn't getting called up from the minor leagues. It's a cardinal sin for a reason, and I think that permanent lifetime ban from ever playing or being associated with the game in any way is an important thing for every future player or employee to have in the back of their mind, should they get approached by someone telling them to fake an injury, or tamper with the baseballs, or something like that.
Calvin, I suspect you and I have significantly different perspectives on sports betting. You are working on making a living through betting, I care not a whit for anything more than a friendly $5 wager now and then, and based only on which team I WANT to win, no spread, no nothing. Just win or lose. Correct me if I am wrong, but your perspective on integrity of the game seems to be based on the effects of non-integrous behavior on the potential outcomes of sports betting.
IMO, a player cannot seriously affect the integrity of the game. The game (any sport) is what it is, just a game. It will survive bad actors, who have been around in every era. There are plenty of integrity-challenged individuals who cast a bad light on their sport, yet are allowed to continue to participate in the game, and remain eligible for honors. I think what is meant by "integrity of the game", when spoken by leaders of leagues, is more related to the integrity of the league or organization controlling those players within the league. As was mentioned by others, gambling in sports was once forbidden, but now that most leagues, professional and otherwise, not only accept betting, but condone, sanction, and benefit from it, they have forfeited the high ground in claiming harm to the game's integrity.
My take on Pete Rose is that, no, he should not have placed bets on any team within his sport while he was playing or managing, but if gambling in sports has gained acceptance of the league, then Pete Rose's performance on the field should be the greatest (or only) factor in his induction into the HOF, and there is no argument based on his performance that should keep him out.
I, for one, am glad it has, and I hope he gets into the Hall.
I pretty firmly disagree. If he was in fact only betting on his own team to win (which there's no way to prove, how do we know he wasn't taking them against the spread, or god forbid betting against them), then he's still impacting the integrity of the game. He can do things such as saving his best reliever for the next game, where he could have already bet what is called a look-ahead line. He can overextend a pitcher in a game that he has extra money on. He can know whether a promising young player is or isn't getting called up from the minor leagues. It's a cardinal sin for a reason, and I think that permanent lifetime ban from ever playing or being associated with the game in any way is an important thing for every future player or employee to have in the back of their mind, should they get approached by someone telling them to fake an injury, or tamper with the baseballs, or something like that.
Calvin, I suspect you and I have significantly different perspectives on sports betting. You are working on making a living through betting, I care not a whit for anything more than a friendly $5 wager now and then, and based only on which team I WANT to win, no spread, no nothing. Just win or lose. Correct me if I am wrong, but your perspective on integrity of the game seems to be based on the effects of non-integrous behavior on the potential outcomes of sports betting.
IMO, a player cannot seriously affect the integrity of the game. The game (any sport) is what it is, just a game. It will survive bad actors, who have been around in every era. There are plenty of integrity-challenged individuals who cast a bad light on their sport, yet are allowed to continue to participate in the game, and remain eligible for honors. I think what is meant by "integrity of the game", when spoken by leaders of leagues, is more related to the integrity of the league or organization controlling those players within the league. As was mentioned by others, gambling in sports was once forbidden, but now that most leagues, professional and otherwise, not only accept betting, but condone, sanction, and benefit from it, they have forfeited the high ground in claiming harm to the game's integrity.
My take on Pete Rose is that, no, he should not have placed bets on any team within his sport while he was playing or managing, but if gambling in sports has gained acceptance of the league, then Pete Rose's performance on the field should be the greatest (or only) factor in his induction into the HOF, and there is no argument based on his performance that should keep him out.
I think betting on the sport you're playing, and taking steroids, are very similar. If someone feels that cheating, in either form, is not a disqualifier from the hall of fame, then that's ideologically consistent at least. If we ignore my job, and think about it purely from a fan's point of view, then I think that black cloud that hangs over Pete Rose is important for the future of the game.
You're 100% correct that gambling is being shoved down everyone's throats 24/7. It's obnoxious, invasive, and particularly harmful to teenagers watching the commercials and seeing lies being sold about potentially winning millions of dollars while their brains are developing. I agree with everything you said there.
For me, I just think that black cloud is important for the integrity of the games in the future. In the same way that I don't go robbing Walmart due to the potential repercussions of it, I think that it's helpful to have that black cloud permanently hanging over people like Pete Rose, so that future players and team employees always have it in their head. Without the integrity of the game, a fan will lose interest. If the games are fixed, it's just WWE. If in the back of your mind, you're legitimately wondering if what you're watching is even real, will you still hold the same interest in the game, as a fan? Whatever we can do to reduce the number of Pete Rose scenarios, I think is good. I think that the permanent punishment, even after his lifetime is over, is a net positive to professional sports as a whole.
Comments
https://www.discoverwildlife.com/environment/trees-communicate-during-solar-eclipse?utm_campaign=website&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nautilus-newsletter
👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼Mushroom 🍄 guys have been saying this for years about the mycelium network.
A good cigar and whiskey solve most problems.
The flood of calls for these customers has been wild and we have zero resolution for them.
https://www.dispatch.com/story/money/cars/recalls/2025/04/30/is-my-car-affected-gm-recall-check/83366713007/
https://nautil.us/this-is-your-brain-on-silence-235023/
>
>
Guess I need to buy a mirror
This is gold
https://apple.news/AQU98LC3ET-yMcTKifGP_6g
You have a resolution...... send them to the Ford dealership......
Mites are almost certainly a made-up or artificial taxon according to recent phylogenetic analyses. For the past century, the hypothesis that mites represent a natural taxon (i.e. a single lineage) was heavily based on a misunderstanding that their mouthpart region was modified into what is termed a “gnathosoma.” This line of reasoning is circular: Mites have been treated as a proper taxon because of the gnathosoma; the gnathosoma has been treated as a proper character because of mites. (Image courtesy of Samuel Bolton, Ph.D.)
https://entomologytoday.org/2025/05/07/mites-made-up-taxon-analysis-debunks-classification-acari/
A ‘Trump Card Visa’ Is Already Showing Up in Immigration Forms
Donald Trump has proposed launching a “gold card” program offering US residency for $5 million. Elon Musk’s DOGE has begun rolling out the technology to enable it.
https://www.wired.com/story/doge-trump-gold-visa-program-immigration
Reading about deliberate ignorance.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11019-012-9449-x
"[W]here I give someone (against their will) reliable information about themselves or their condition which is relevant to decisions they must make I may violate a liberty they assert but I do not violate their autonomy, for the information I give them is necessary for their autonomous decision making. (Harris and Keywood 2001, page 419"
I refuse to believe this.
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
Narcissism & Denial
https://narcinfohub.com/narcissism-denial/
They have just upped the ante, there are untold millions of Chinese nationals that bought green cards for $1 million in the past several years. I'm not singling out Chinese, I have a friend that this has been his business model for the last 8-10 years, seeking Chinese investors in exchange for green cards. He controls several hundred million in investment capital.
"We live in a paradoxical time: despite the proliferation of critical thinking courses in schools and universities, our public discourse has never been more dominated by inflexible certainties, tribal allegiances to dubious ‘facts’, and a profound aversion to questioning our own beliefs. In an age where certainty is currency, doubt has become a radical act.
"Our social media ecosystems reward conviction, not contemplation. Politicians trumpet certainties rather than explore complexities. Even our educational institutions often teach critical thinking as a weapon to dismantle others’ arguments rather than a tool for examining our own. The skill we most desperately need is the very one we’ve neglected to cultivate: the ability to hold our own certainties in suspension."
More here:
https://psyche.co/ideas/these-lessons-in-scepticism-could-make-the-world-a-better-place
For years, North Korea has been secretly placing young IT workers inside Western companies. With AI, their schemes are now more devious—and effective—than ever.
https://www.wired.com/story/north-korea-stole-your-tech-job-ai-interviews/
https://www.thedrive.com/news/new-jeep-wrangler-truck-cab-kit-is-giving-me-all-kinds-of-bad-ideas?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=socialflow&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR5ZoycyavW7zP2ERXSZ3NY8RER8UeDlOmmklvZ2wjw3xLE3R-F2tSAfx2Iqrg_aem_LdeW5ytC58A4mZAq3z7lpg
https://apple.news/Ahmmo97ZBRdq7TnRa5rh8uw
Didn’t think I’d ever see it happen.
I don't have problems, just more work to do.
Was that in Florida?
Trapped in the People's Communist Republic of Massachusetts.
Slidell, LA
I don't have problems, just more work to do.
I, for one, am glad it has, and I hope he gets into the Hall.
Just giving it a test run. No biggie.
I pretty firmly disagree. If he was in fact only betting on his own team to win (which there's no way to prove, how do we know he wasn't taking them against the spread, or god forbid betting against them), then he's still impacting the integrity of the game. He can do things such as saving his best reliever for the next game, where he could have already bet what is called a look-ahead line. He can overextend a pitcher in a game that he has extra money on. He can know whether a promising young player is or isn't getting called up from the minor leagues. It's a cardinal sin for a reason, and I think that permanent lifetime ban from ever playing or being associated with the game in any way is an important thing for every future player or employee to have in the back of their mind, should they get approached by someone telling them to fake an injury, or tamper with the baseballs, or something like that.
I think it reflects on the general acceptance of gambling in our society. When I was a kid gambling was something done in the dark, I still feel guilty about winning 5 cents on the 69 Mets. Nobody gambled for a living unless you were a mobster. That said, Calvin's concerns are totally legitimate but I think when a guy is dead we can probably quit kicking dirt on him.
Especially considering that the taboo that was sports betting is now at the forefront of every broadcast. As Frank said last night, they were “lifetime” bans. Lifetime is over when you’re dead. It still doesn’t mean any of them will get into the Hall of Fame.
Me personally, I feel that the hypocrisy is beyond ridiculous. The different sports entities have all embraced gambling and are making fortunes off of it. Seems like every segment is brought to you by one of the gambling sites. All of the sports shows have devoted entire blocks of programming towards it. Are players receiving part of that revenue? If not, they should be because it is revenue derived directly from their actions. It’s no different than jersey sales. Then you have the networks that have always chastised athletes for gambling. Yet they also devote segment to sports betting. I understand rules are rules…and I agree. But the hypocrisy is just as bad as the crime.
Frank pointed out on vHerf that the announcement is redundant since if it's a lifetime ban that means the ban is over with or without the announcement.
I think it's just a ploy to get people talking about a boring sport.
Is it just me, or are some of you picturing @CalvinAndHobo with a fedora, pin-striped suit with a carnation on the lapel, pointy toed shoes and a briefcase handcuffed to his wrist?
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Calvin, I suspect you and I have significantly different perspectives on sports betting. You are working on making a living through betting, I care not a whit for anything more than a friendly $5 wager now and then, and based only on which team I WANT to win, no spread, no nothing. Just win or lose. Correct me if I am wrong, but your perspective on integrity of the game seems to be based on the effects of non-integrous behavior on the potential outcomes of sports betting.
IMO, a player cannot seriously affect the integrity of the game. The game (any sport) is what it is, just a game. It will survive bad actors, who have been around in every era. There are plenty of integrity-challenged individuals who cast a bad light on their sport, yet are allowed to continue to participate in the game, and remain eligible for honors. I think what is meant by "integrity of the game", when spoken by leaders of leagues, is more related to the integrity of the league or organization controlling those players within the league. As was mentioned by others, gambling in sports was once forbidden, but now that most leagues, professional and otherwise, not only accept betting, but condone, sanction, and benefit from it, they have forfeited the high ground in claiming harm to the game's integrity.
My take on Pete Rose is that, no, he should not have placed bets on any team within his sport while he was playing or managing, but if gambling in sports has gained acceptance of the league, then Pete Rose's performance on the field should be the greatest (or only) factor in his induction into the HOF, and there is no argument based on his performance that should keep him out.
I think betting on the sport you're playing, and taking steroids, are very similar. If someone feels that cheating, in either form, is not a disqualifier from the hall of fame, then that's ideologically consistent at least. If we ignore my job, and think about it purely from a fan's point of view, then I think that black cloud that hangs over Pete Rose is important for the future of the game.
You're 100% correct that gambling is being shoved down everyone's throats 24/7. It's obnoxious, invasive, and particularly harmful to teenagers watching the commercials and seeing lies being sold about potentially winning millions of dollars while their brains are developing. I agree with everything you said there.
For me, I just think that black cloud is important for the integrity of the games in the future. In the same way that I don't go robbing Walmart due to the potential repercussions of it, I think that it's helpful to have that black cloud permanently hanging over people like Pete Rose, so that future players and team employees always have it in their head. Without the integrity of the game, a fan will lose interest. If the games are fixed, it's just WWE. If in the back of your mind, you're legitimately wondering if what you're watching is even real, will you still hold the same interest in the game, as a fan? Whatever we can do to reduce the number of Pete Rose scenarios, I think is good. I think that the permanent punishment, even after his lifetime is over, is a net positive to professional sports as a whole.