g0d0fm15ch13f

We split our PLUTONIUM into 2 bombs because one was gadget, the test. Little boy (Hiroshima) was a uranium gun design and fat man (Nagasaki) was plutonium implosion.

Edit: To be clear your point about our bluff absolutely stands. It would likely be months at best before we would be able to drop another fission weapon of any design

Tree style tabs

Makes it simultaneously easier to open a billion pages but also manages them nicely

I once drank so much milk I did puke. 10/10 experience tbh, cause like, I love milk. But also that was a good solid push during the purge phase of that.

I would waterboard myself with a tall cold frothy glass of whole chocolate milk. I’m a dirty little milk slut. I think I was essentially stockholmed into it. I remember being like “ew fat bad” as a kid and drinking skim for cereal. But somewhere down the line that turned into me just slopping heavy whipping cream neat. I mean fuck me I’m drinking a chocolate milk on my walk to work right fucking now.

It just means more.™️

And so the point arises, what do these companies provide that standardization doesn’t?

Am I misunderstanding things or is this a bit? Selling an entire dollar store type for the british version of a dollar is absolutely hilarious if true.

There are some really good reasons to make changes, not trying to say that this was the case in the parent comment, but there are certainly cases where this makes sense. About halfway through my discrete math final my professor wrote a curve on the board based on exam results from the other test session. He realized that he hadn’t properly taught some concepts and he thought it would be unfair for us to suffer because of his mistakes. Should he have been forced to stick to a non curved exam because he hadn’t announced it in the rubric or to the first exam session?

Lego Star Wars instilled this as well as leaps of faith

I know this won’t interest most lemmy users, but the forums for most large american colligate sports programs are alive and well.

*Dense dog

The Song? I love Santa Baby. Easy top 10 xmas track for me and likely top 5.

Yeah, the few at the top bring in revenue, but most don’t. Speculating on future revenue is not helpful.

Not true? Even schools as low as 220 in that list are bringing in a profit, admittedly not as much, but if we only look at the schools that have the vastly overpaid coaches then we start only looking at the schools that are bringing in multiple millions of dollars a year. The usatoday numbers include contributions as well, and as the Princeton paper shows those donations increase with high performing teams (again the teams with overpaid coaches).

As for your articles, in your first link look at the schools that are actually taking money for athletics. These are all tiny schools, without a major cfb or m/wbb program to subsidize the rest of athletics. So again the schools with crazy overpaid coaches aren’t taking much tuition money (searching for the cfb bluebloods in that list shows most charge no money or somewhere in the range of 30 to 50 dollars annually, so covering your costs at the student rec center effectively).

For your second article, we’re only looking at P5 schools, not D1. This is good as it gives us a better look at the schools with overpaid coahces. But the number in the article is cherry picked. They are using generated revenue for that figure, not total revenue. If you follow their own link (https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2019/11/12/finances-of-intercollegiate-athletics-database.aspx) and look at the numbers for total net you’ll see P5 is bringing in on average 4.9 million and this is from the NCAA’s numbers themselves. Admittedly looking at the range you’ll find a P5 school losing 34 million last year. What’s important to note with these figures is that often P5 programs are jumping back and forth from red to black year over year as they continually expand facilities. And with there being only one football stadium per university, this mostly means upgrades to student athletic facilities/equipment or non revenue sport facilities/equipment.

Your last article seems to mostly be a pro NIL piece laying out why college athletes deserve to be paid. And for what it’s worth I think that you’re right here. Especially revenue earning teams should see some of that revenue go towards their athletes. Those young men and women are putting their bodies on the line for their respective universities and deserve compensation for that.

At the end of the day, I think it’s no coincidence that the schools with the overpaid coaches are bringing in more money than the schools that don’t put as much emphasis on athletics. And I totally believe that the presidents of these huge universities know better than either of us when it comes to running and funding their schools. Even if I believe that the money coaches earn is ridiculous. Also if you want to get really upset, look up how much Jimbo Fisher is getting paid to NOT coach at Texas A&M.

Title 9 is the definition of great idea but terrible execution. It has caused tons of men’s non revenue programs to fold in the past few decades. Notably, as a swimmer, the University of Iowa no longer has a men’s swim team, and they literally invented butterfly.

https://www.statesman.com/story/sports/college/longhorns/2023/06/14/texas-athletics-just-behind-ohio-state-in-revenue-in-2021-22-school-year/70322362007/

Literally the first link I clicked shows for the 2021-2022 year these universities listed bring in somewhere between 1 and 20 million

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances

Here is the referenced list where you can check all D1 universities for this year.

Edit: And with TV deals being restructured I wouldn’t be surprised if the SEC/B1G start bringing in even more.

Double Edit: And regardless, alumni donations for academics increase relative to that teams performance (specifically championship appearances/wins) https://gceps.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/162rosen.pdf

And how do you propose to pay for this world class research in a world where federal university funding is constantly hamstrung by conservatives and skyrocketing tuition costs still can’t cover it? If I had the ability to charge 100,000 people 20 bucks (actually way more) a week, that’ll certainly create a dent (not to mention apparel revenue and TV contracts). Sports departments are net positive revenue for an institution, and when they aren’t they get cut. Again I fully believe that coaches are overpaid, but it’s not for no reason.

The idea though is that a good sports team will draw eyes to the university as a whole. Texas, California, Tennessee, Florida… All these programs have vastly overpaid coaches it’s true. But as a result you get free advertising as fans wear the team colors all over town.

Also shameless plug for our college football community !cfb@fanaticus.social

That’s libertarians, they are south on the political compass, not east

Ootl, who is screaming woman?

Dude one stole some Doritos from me once. Wtf do you mean “they can’t hurt you”