The issue is that even when your target is "up", using common characteristics as insults means lots of people below that are going to catch strays, as it were.
For anyone concerned, this was fixed in 7-zip version 24.07, which was released back in June.
Either we get gravitational waves of the two singularities continuing to orbit each other within this one big event horizon, or we don’t.
We don't. That's why the indicator of it happening is a rapidly elevating frequency as they get closer that suddenly drops to nothing once the event horizons converge.
I already addressed this in an earlier comment. Event horizons aren't objects, they're regions. Your final suggestion here is roughly correct, the black holes proper never merge from our frame of reference but their event horizons do long before that would happen.
Well, no. Because the "event" of that movement never makes it outside. Hence event horizon. Causality itself cannot traverse it.
edit: Put differently, the propagation of gravity still happens at the local speed of light and is constrained by curved spacetime, just like everything else. Gravity itself is, in a sense, affected by gravity.
Gravity is a vector field without distinguishing differences between one source and another. The gravity of the falling mass always was and always will be "joined" with that of the black hole, and every other piece of surrounding matter. It's not like light where two nearby sources remain distinguishable. There's no "bobbled" structure, just a very very slight shift in the location of the center of mass which gets smaller as the falling object gets closer.
As for the faster rotation of colliding black holes, event horizons aren't objects, they're regions of spacetime, and larger than the actual "surface" of a black hole. They combine into a single event horizon long before they ever actually "touch" each other.
Everything that approaches the event horizon appears to slow down to outside observers asymptotically approaching zero velocity at the moment it reaches the event horizon. At the same time it also red-shifts asymptotically toward infinite wavelengths, becoming undetectable.
An outside observer never sees it cross the event horizon.
Bad design. Plenty of EVs have their brake pedal apply a mixture of regen and friction braking, with the actual proportions dependent on factors like how quickly you hit the brake (soft braking is entirely regen, slamming the brakes apples almost entirely actual brakes in my experience), or how much charge is in the battery (you can't safely pump power from regen into a nearly full battery).
Plenty of them also let you control how much passive regen happens when you lift the pedal, with the default on mine at least feeling very similar to the slowing you get when lifting off the gas with an automatic transmission. It's adjustable from none at all to moderate braking force, and when I turn it up lifting my foot from the gas illuminates my brake lights.
I disagree pretty strongly with Squid here. The first season was great but it went pretty sharply downhill after.
The actual amount of centrifugal force is also tiny. Sure, it's a relatively fast linear speed compared to something like a merry-go-round, but a merry-go-round's angular velocity is much higher, and that's the one you use when calculating the force trying to fling you off.
Also, centripetal force is the inward force observed by an external non-rotating reference frame which deflects motion into a curve. You've conflated it with centrifugal force, which is the outward "fictitious" force experienced in a rotating reference frame.
Plenty (maybe even most) of 1st level manages will see and understand, but are still unable or unwilling to push back on unrealistic expectations coming from outside
My manager directly told me after a "meets expectations" annual review that he had originally put "exceeds expectations" but was overridden by someone above him and told he could not give me that evaluation. I then got a less-than-inflation "raise".
I have adjusted my efforts accordingly.
They're absolutely being disingenuous, but I think it's important to keep in mind that the purpose of debate is not generally to change the mind of the person you're debating with. It's intended to be done with an audience (or judges in a formal competitive debate), and it's the audience that you're trying to sway to your side.
Street Fighter 6 uses two systems. League Points are a "keep them playing" type, and Master Rate is pretty much pure Elo.
Everyone starts with LP only and initial placement matches put you into a league with progressively fewer guard rails as you live higher. Rookie league can't lose LP at all, there's a win streak bonus up to gold, and you can't demote to a lower league until platinum. Throughout it all there's very slight upward pressure on LP, you get slightly more more a win then you lose for a loss.
Finally you reach the topmost league, Master, the final guard rails fall away and you're given 1500MR to join in the net zero Elo ranking pool. You basically need to demonstrate that you have a willingness to keep playing before they will use that style of matchmaking. "Real" skill based ranking effectively begins there, with the lower ranks being made more to show dedication rather than just ability.
Honestly it's an easy trap to fall into if you enter the space without prior knowledge and taking everyone at their word. I almost fell into it years back when gamergate was just getting rolling. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that nepotism, preferential treatment, and paid shills are a major part of modern game marketing. But they'll get an initial hook in based on that idea and then slow-boil you on the idea that diversity and inclusion are also part of the problem. Soon that becomes the focus and people find themselves arguing that Aloy having visible peach fuzz if you zoom the camera a quarter inch from her face in photo mode is evidence that they're trying to erase "real women" from games.
It's crazy.
usually, by "woke" movies people mean movies only made for the sake of being "woke", no?
This is what people using the term really want you to think. That they're fine with incidental/statistically correct/non-performative diversity and inclusion and are just pointing out when it happens for the sake of itself to the detriment of the quality of media.
The reality though is quite different, and people will call "woke" at almost any non-white, non-straight, or non-male character in a major role, or a non-cis character in even a passing role.
My partner was subscribed to Crave for ages. A little while back she was in the middle of a rewatch of Sons of Anarchy when the app started to act up and wouldn't work, so I grabbed a copy and put it on Jellyfin.
She was floored by how much immediately better the video quality was and cancelled Crave the next day. Shocked at how much worse the experience was with the paid service compared to free.
Because this post has made it to page one of "all" when sorting by active and attracted attention outside its original community.