There is quite a lot of pressure put outside from the beer of a full bottle, but that little bit of air is probably enough to cause it to implode at some point.

I'll be honest; I have no idea how to estimate that. I'm sure there are folks on here who can (and might). It's probably not as deep as you'd think.

I'd imagine the cap will fail under the pressure long before the forces get high enough to implode the bottle.

> And the poisonous ones apparently don't use color as a warning signal, and don't smell all that bad, and some of the poisons have really mild effects, like "gives only some people diarrhea" or "makes a hangover worse".

Some of the poisonous ones even taste really good, and don't start making you sick for a day or two (and then you die horribly). You hear about it from time to time, where people have the best dinner of their life and then are dead.

You're likely referring to the death cap (Amanita phalloides), which is reportedly quite tasty. But there's also a mushroom that's both deadly poisonous and a sought-after, commercially sold delicacy, the only difference being the method of preparation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyromitra_esculenta

Although recent research suggests that some poison remains even after careful preparation, and that consumption may even be linked to ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease).

Partly I am sure.

I have read stories similar to what I wrote from China as well. I think Europe too, but I would not swear on it.

Roomba as well. Awesome at first when we bought our first home.

But then we filled it with stuff and got a doggo. Those hairs fast-track the process of jamming the wheels and sweeper. Why do we need a robot vacuum when we still have to vacuum by hand?

I have a deep and abiding love of Powershell but you are spot on.

It is amazing until you run into one of these insane behaviors that somehow nobody ever fixed.

(Some are actually fixed finally in 7.x - like issues with filenames with grave characters in them)

I like PowerShell too, but in what universe other than ours (clearly the worst one) is it even possible for loading a module to take more time than the blink of an eye?

Microsoft should find it embarrassing how long it takes powershell to load a module. Pushing <tab> to autocomplete a cmdlet name should never take more than maybe 100 milliseconds.

Loading times surely is not a problem unique to Powershell. The more complex and advanced a software gets, the more it takes to load data into RAM that appears to the user redundant.

This is the most noticable with startup times. My favorite software (Firefox) has this solved; it opens up in reasonable amounts of time, even if it takes a moment after to show the first website. My second favorite software (Inkscape), meanwhile, takes so long just to show the main UI that the developers didn't think anything of adding a splash screen: an overt acknowledgement that you're keeping the user waiting.

I, too, wish that everything were more lean and snappy, but clearly this is still an unsolved problem.

Reminds of why I sold my Windows. One day I just had enough of things breaking in all the colors of the rainbow.

For every problem I have on my macOS, some poor Windows user have experienced 50 non-Googleable errors. I do like Powershell though.

The consequences of fucking it up are low, too.

If they get caught, they just take the document down and deny it ever got posted. Claim whatever people can show is a fake.

Since they control the levers of government, there's few with the resources and appetite for holding them accountable. So far, we haven't un-redacted anything too damning, so push hasn't come to shove yet.

The only might change if there's a "blue wave" in the midterms, but even then I wouldn't count on it.

> What's the chance of this being some 4D chess where the government has already edited the files, and then presented them as redacted so the "unredacted (but edited)" version looks more genuine?

With how they have pushed out any career public servants who were good at their jobs in favor of sycophants and loyalists, I'm not sure government organizations are still capable of playing 4D chess, if they ever were.

I tried to reproduce this - turns out the affected files weren't in the data sets recently released, but other files on the DOJ site (now taken down).

I guess the big take-away is scrape everything ASAP when it comes out. I haven't found any meaningful differences yet, but file hashes are different in the published data set zip files available today versus when Archive.org took a snapshot a few days ago.

I did write a bit of a tool which will detect and log and dump the text of affected PDF's, since redacting via drawing black boxes as well as using dark-colored highlights are both programmatically detectable. Pretty trivial to do so. Happy Holidays for anyone else who has the day off!

There's a lot of these lists, but it's interesting the differences in who tops the list:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/least-cor...

There's more than one type of government that can resist corruption, since much that drives corruption is extra-governmental (populace education level, media environment, trust in institutions, wealth equality, etc).

So it's unsurprising there are different optimal anti-corruption government types for different combinations of those qualities.

Yes. But, I don’t think a single one of those “least corrupt” top contenders could be described as:

> The solution is really to keep the scope of government small so that any corruption isn't detrimental to the populace, and they can handle it in the next election.

Which was kind of my point. In reality, the least corruptible types of governments tend to be ones libertarian-skewing Americans would crassly describe as socialist.

I'm not an expert, but aren't Switzerland and Singapore pretty lightweight governments?

Singapore is strange place - aside from being a city-state. You'll get sent to the gulags for being in possession of a joint, but prostitution is legal. I know a guy who once got in a bar fight there, and he immediately packed up and went to the airport.

I wouldn't exactly call it lightweight government.

I have heard the policing is very strict, but I thought on the business side they were extremely laissez faire.

The graph here can get a bit wonky. And Switzerland is definitely the closest example of “limited government” working, I’d agree. But both of those countries, e.g., have universal healthcare. Switzerland through a more strict version of something like the ACA. Singapore, state-funded. Switzerland has compulsory military service, higher taxes, more gun regulations, etc. than the U.S. I think the U.S. beats these two on having a more conventionally “limited government” design.

That's a solution. Another would be to enshrine in law independent watchdog agencies whose goal is to win trophies for rooting out corruption, reducing waste, preventing or breaking up harmful monopolies, etc.

> win trophies for rooting out corruption

Many a corrupt government has touted their anti-corruption activities that inexplicably seem to snare almost exclusively their political opponents.

How valuable are those trophies compared to bribes, or the tacit bribes of cushy "consultancy" roles? How do you stop lobbyists from gutting those regulators - what use is a fiercely independent regulator that has no resources?

Good governance is hard.

Getting money out of politics is the hardest part.

I am not sure how the US will find the political will short of getting burned badly enough for partisans to align on reform. How bad does it have to get?

The apt question is 'How bad for whom does it have to get?'

Because the 00s+ US government is in no way propped up by all stakeholding groups in equal amounts.