Tensions involving the US? Because the combination of the US and Canada has been self-sufficient in petroleum for a few years now: i.e., the US need go no further than Canada to get all the oil it needs. The US would be self-sufficient now if the Saudis hadn't lowered their prices about 6 years ago in an explicit attempt to discourage US production; as it is, US self-sufficiency will take a few more years.
Now that the US has the technical means to extract "tight oil" just the state of Texas has enough extractible oil to last the US 100 years, I saw one expert say recently.
(Of course, burning all that oil would cause horrible climate change, but that is true of the Iranian oil, too.)
I have long suspected that the USA deliberately held back its own oil production to maintain a strategic reserve. This policy seems to be ending though as evidenced by today's high domestic production.
Assuming this is true, can you show me the benefit of a past military campaign against an oil-rich power? Iraq would be my preference, but I’m open to whatever example you have at hand.
It's not a matter of state. It's a market like any other. Think how common usurpation is in the financial sector -- LIBOR scandal, Bank of England audio leaks, Flash Trading Arbitrage, Goldman Sachs's ABACUS scam.
Then, apply the same tactics to energy.
Modern wars are not political, they are theatre to distract from the real goal, pillaging by the crony capitalists.
Just look at how many times they've tried to trick Trump into war.
1) The White Helmets faked a chlorine bomb in Duoma, then
2) CNN faked a Venezuelan military revolt,
3) also framed Molotov cocktail attacks, and
4) the Hawaiian nuke warning was faked. And now,
5) Iranian terrorists just waltz through security and set off an explosion at a US embassy.
If you want to talk about Iraq, then you'll have to go ALL the way back and look up Building 7.
> Trump wasn't even a politician when the CIA decided to topple Syria.
Strawman.
> Stop being so butthurt and think!
This is completely unnecessary, and against site guidelines.
When the commander in chief, who's making decisions about where to send troops and drop bombs says
> "We want to bring our soldiers home. But we did leave soldiers because we're keeping the oil," he said on 1 November. "I like oil. We’re keeping the oil."
then it's pretty hard to say that he's not motivated by the oil, innit?
On the contrary, this falls within Nassim Taleb's Minority Rule. Prions, being nearly indestructable, are an intransigent minority that will eventually hold sway over the rest of us.
Many on this board point to the inelasticity of their transmissible potential and call this fear-mongering. However, it is that same inelasticity that makes them intransigent. Once they have compromised an instrument, that instrument will remain compromised until each prion has specifically been destroyed. When you pair that intransigence with its lengthy incubation period, you actually have a force multiplier that, while not viral, would be scary enough to change behavior.
Fortunately, the article hints that retinal scans may eventually be used for initial diagnosis.
Interesting how much comment hype was on these boards when everyone felt safe to jump on the Red Scare Bandwagon, but now that the story falls apart those same commenters are crickets ...
I would have expected better from Hacker News.
But a solid thanks to the Forensicator for doing the math that all you "Hackers" skirted
If T-mobile has a weakness, it is not signal strength. Coverage maps are a red herring. If you look at AT&T coverage in SoCal, you would think that they have it on lock. However in Downtown LA, AT&T is atrocious, and T-Mobile is stellar.
Even if signal is weak where you live, T-Mobile was the first to unlock WiFi Calling for its phones. They even give you an awesome router for your home.
If somebody is telling you that T-Mobile coverage sucks, its because they have no other complaints than this subjective opinion. Remember, coverage = Your Mileage May Vary
this is only true in cities, which I guess covers the majority of people, but as someone who camps across the country, and often drives there, T-mobile is terrible outside most metro areas, and I rely on my girlfriend's verizon to keep us from getting lost and to link up with other campers.
And I'm not just talking about the deep boonies either. Even in state parks that are less than an hour from densely populated cities, I often have no bars.
The issue is Verizon and AT&T have coverage in these places. They’re just not a good choice if you are frequently out of the city. Very cheap though, it’s a good fit for a lot of people. (I recently switched from Verizon to T-Mobile on my iPad and have an AT&T phone.)
A few days ago I was driving back from Rainier in Washington State and had full bars LTE on AT&T and no service at all on T-Mobile. It was on 410 right outside of Enumclaw, WA. Had to be almost in town to get any signal from T-Mobile.
AT&T and Verizon actually have some coverage inside the park around the Sunrise area (I believe coming from the Crystal Mountain ski area) while T-Mobile has none.
To be fair, the T-Mobile coverage map is extremely spotty in WA so it's not like they're claiming they have a great network here, but it is very noticeably worse than the two largest networks. From their map it looks like they're weak in the whole Northwest. Sort of curious considering they are based here, but I get that the topography is difficult.
In the Midpeninsula Open Space lands (e.g. San Mateo county), I routinely lose data (even 3G and 2G) and often voice on T-Mobile while other carriers are fine.
In one of these (Russian Ridge?), there is a pair of towers with maybe 30 transmitters and dishes. Even there, nothing on T-Mobile.
Even my neighborhood tower was crap for about 2 months. Only after the fact did they acknowledge the problem.
By no means would I call T-Mobile's rural coverage great, but how recent is the phone you're using with them? Specifically, does it have Band 12 support? If not, you're missing out on most of their coverage improvements.
T-Mobile picked up some lower frequency (greater range, penetration) licenses around the end of last year. I'm waiting for their deployment/integration into their service, to see what difference they make. I've grown increasingly tired of Verizon Wireless's recent behavior, but they have had coverage in areas I visit where T-Mobile has not.
Something to consider is that only newer phone models support all the new spectrum that Tmo has utilized to expand coverage. YMMV but some of the lower band stuff is essential for coverage in rural areas.
The original service was called Farecast before Microsoft bought them. It used to be very good, but the prediction info gradually became marginalized. We may never know the truth, but it feels as if Microsoft caved to pressure from the airlines.
Farecast and subsequent Bing Travel employee here: I had already moved on by the time the decision was made to discontinue the fare prediction service but I think it was mostly due to the amount of work it took to maintain a high accuracy rate and the large amounts of data we had to ingest to do so. Over time, there were less people from the original team working on it and the data options were limited (ITA was a major source of data) so it was discontinued. Glad to see we were ahead of our time!
Such an apologist.
NY Times sent stories to Hillary for pre-approval.
I worked in journalism. In my time, this was a scarlet-letter offense. The conspirators should be black-balled from journalism.
Nope, you nailed it. You've read enough of our prostitutes to correctly identify the state of US journalism. Fortunately, they should be completely ineffectual very soon thanks to efforts of my write-in presidential candidate Wik I. Leaks
And yet, perhaps an equally-apt word is infamous, because 'priming' effects appear often among those psychological research results that fail-to-reproduce:
Although, to be fair to Richard Thaler, the article you cite itself falls prey to the 1/n "mental accounting" heuristic. It gives half of its attention to a call center replication that did support the priming effect.
