Is your argument that since you don't want to do this job you don't think other people should be able to either? It certainly isn't unethical. Amazon offered people money to do this job and people agreed to take those jobs.
The key is half-life. A few fragments of dinosaur DNA surely remain, because half-life means there is a certain probability of decay over a particular unit of time. But enough to re-assemble a dinosaur? That's unlikely to the point of near-impossibility.
Even if we got really really lucky and found some that had spent most of its existence frozen deep in Antarctica or something, that would only open the potential of restoring a single dinosaur lineage and not the vast array of species depicted in Jurassic Park. That's total fantasy.
That's one way to look at it I guess :-) (note: I personally think content should be the focus of a smartphone, so the screen should be as big as physically possible; 6.7" is my current limit though).
And in the past year, there were precisely 2 Android phones with <= 4.7" screens. Lava Z40 and BLU Advance L5. There were zero that were as narrow as the original SE.
I haven't tested it but people have had success with adding an "alternative appearance" in the FaceID settings and having it scan your face with half of it covered by a mask. Here is an article with pictures describing the process:
I can see people not liking phones like > 6" screens because they are too hard to hold but it seems like 4" screens are too far in the opposite direction.
Hard disagree. 4-inches screens were a thing because that’s the perfect size for a human hand. Phones became huge when content consumption got prioritized over ergonomics.
I have an iPhone 6 that I keep around (I normally use an iPhone SE, of course) and I don't really like it much; I find it uncomfortable to hold for long periods of time and I constantly have to use Reachability to get at stuff :(
Given how quickly forecasts were cut from 200,000 to 60,000 it is likely those estimates of millions of deaths were never correct. However, for the sake of argument lets assume that it was accurate and 2 million would have died. We can estimate the value of those lives saved using the value of statistical life that the EPA has for evaluating the effect of regulations[1]. Adjusting for inflation gives a value of $9.5 million today. Saving 2 million lives at 9.5 million per life gives a value of $19 trillion. The 2008 Great Recession cost Americans $22 trillion[2]. Many expect the recession now to be worse than the 2008 financial crisis[3][4].
When you enact a bad policy, you can always claim it would have been worse if you hadn't acted. It's not like we can go back in time and see what would happen if the policy wasn't enacted.
I dob't know if it is the same content but China Daily, a daily newspaper owned by the Publicity Department of the Communist Party of China, has purchased full page ads in American news papers that look like news articles.
