As someone who worked from home for almost a decade before being pulled into the office, I regularly got flack from my peers for it as well as older boomer types. IME, people who are forced into the office frequently feel a sense of “fairness” where they want everyone else to come in as well.
“If I have to be miserable, you should too”
Sadly, getting more places with less money is absolutely possible, but the key to making it happen is abandoning planetary science. It’s a shift from a paradigm where engineering exists to support planetary science efforts to engineering for engineering’s sake
Have you never heard of tunes?
Any idiot can make substantial software changes to almost any modern car with easily available inexpensive hardware. Look up Cobb, ECUtek, openflashtablet, Hondata, etc
You literally just plug it into a port and flash the software
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me
If you think it’s wrong to keep a cat inside then you shouldn’t have a cat. They’re an invasive species in most of the world and it’s unethical to put them outside regardless of what justifications you come up with
What do you think carbon steel is made from?
Cast iron and steel are largely similar materials, cast iron just has the carbon precipitated out of solution instead of trapped in a crystalline structure
Ironically, the chargers at my office ALSO charge a big markup.
Competition is good, but landlords at offices and apartment buildings have a somewhat captive customer base who will often pay exorbitant prices for convenience.
Unfortunately every apartment I have lived in with charging adds a massive markup to the electricity coming out of the chargers. At one place we were paying $150/month for a space with an EV charger and the electricity coming from the charger was still billed at around 10x the base rate. It was far cheaper to fill our plugin hybrid with gas than to use the charger in our parking space.
I’m sure the same will apply here. It doesn’t help anyone if the complex is allowed to gouge the tenants on the electricity usage.
The claims aren’t colored by propaganda and misinformation
They sure are. A great example would be the videos making the rounds recently about the Israeli drones supposedly making “crying baby noises” to lure people out. This is a classic propaganda technique, the videos are literally just a black screen with some background sound, the Israeli government could kill those people far more easily without such tactics, and anyone who has spent time around drones regularly knows it’s extremely implausible at best.
It’s a blatantly obvious piece of propaganda that was widely accepted because people can’t pause for five seconds to apply a bit of critical thinking to their conclusions.
Just because they’re capable of doing genocide “better” doesn’t mean they aren’t doing it.
It means exactly this. “Genocide” implies a certain intent and this is a very strong argument of the absence of the requisite intent.
Also, quit implying that my comments are right wing or Russian just because they have opinions that don’t align with yours. That’s such a tired trope. I could imply the same of you, but I’m choosing to engage in good faith.
Well maybe you shouldn’t be pushing an agenda that benefits the Russians and far-right at the expense of the Palestinian people?
Honestly, you’re either a badly intentioned troll, lacking in some basic critical thinking skill, or simply willing to see far more Palestinians die for your ideals while you sit back in safety and watch it happen.
The claims of genocide are colored by propaganda and misinformation. Academic researchers are split on the issue, at best. The fact of the matter is that Israel could swiftly end all life in Gaza through overwhelming military force if that was their goal, and this has not happened.
I’d agree that Israel’s actions in Gaza are unethical but there is a stark difference between acting without regard for civilian casualties and outright ethnic cleansing. The evidence doesn’t seem to support the latter.
A good president would divest and sanction Israel
A good president would prioritize what’s best for America, which means preserving the favorable relationship America has with Israel. Meanwhile, a good president would provide humanitarian aid for Palestine and help negotiate for peace.
That’s exactly what Biden is doing and refusing to vote for him harms almost every party involved, including Palestine. Really, the only groups who would benefit are the far right and Russia… makes you wonder where comments like this come from, doesn’t it?
Biden isn’t “committing genocide” and saying he is amounts to simple propaganda.
The conservatives want to take aid away from Ukraine to deliver it to Israel. If Trump wins, far more weapons will be going to Israel than they are now. Repeating propaganda like this is not helpful for the Palestinian people.
Lastly, Israel is an important ally from a strategic perspective. Not only are they our closest ally in the Middle East, but they have a number of important resources like intel semiconductor facilities. Cutting ties with Israel would be bad for America, and the role of the US government is to put America first. It’s more complex than simply supporting one side or the other and Biden is attempting to balance aid for Palestine with preserving our relationship with Israel. That’s exactly what a good president should be doing.
The fact of the matter is that people will happily pay for content if it is made available in a convenient and affordable way. Hell, many people will voluntarily pay artists for content that is available completely for free. That’s how patreon works, and there are self published authors approaching $1M/year in income due to readers choosing to support the author for their hard work.
People have no issue paying content creators.
Piracy rose to prominence in the 2000s because a few executives were funneling massive amounts of money into their pockets by the sale of CDs and cable services that were simultaneously expensive and inconvenient. The studios attacked pirates directly to little effect because you simply can’t stop the free dissemination of information among the public.
Piracy almost completely died when streaming made the alternatives affordable, user friendly and convenient. In a world where the proliferation of streaming services is making content just as expensive and inconvenient as in the old days of cable, it’s only natural that piracy will once again rise to prominence.
If they want to get paid, they simply need to stop fucking with the customer and offer a service people want to pay for.
I find it funny this comment got upvoted more than mine. I am a guidance engineer that worked at NASA on lunar lander programs, it’s literally my job to be an expert in this stuff. Modern computing has reduced propellant usage a bit and improved targeting accuracy, but we have had usable solutions to this problem since the 60s.
Atmosphere makes the problem MUCH harder because the dynamics are far more complicated and the uncertainties are higher.
Yes but a moon landing is fundamentally easier in most respects, while using substantially similar technology, than landing a rocket booster on earth or a rover on mars.
Landing on the moon is, as far as it can be, trivial for a group like NASA. It’s much more challenging for a small private company like Intuitive that has never built a lander before.
Sounds like they should let the kids choose whether they want to you outside or stay in based on whether or not they feel cold
Forcing kids to bring coats is weird to me
Maybe it’s different elsewhere, but I was born into a relatively cold+wet climate and moved to San Diego in elementary school. I didn’t bring a coat because it made me hot, I was acclimated to colder weather, and I didn’t want to carry it around.
They refused to let me go outside for recess for weeks because I didn’t bring a coat and refused to wear one from the lost and found. Finally, one day, they sent me to the principal’s office and called my mom in for a chat to discuss my misbehaving.
My mom’s response was, “You called me in from work for THIS?! If he’s not cold, he’s not cold! He has warm clothing at home. He’s capable of deciding whether or not he would be more comfortable with a jacket on. Let him go outside and leave me alone”
Now we are comparing used cars to new ones? It has always been the case that you get more for your money with a used car than a new one, it’s nothing new.
In any case, these are all just niggly complaints if I’m being honest. It’s far nicer and more spacious than the average family would choose in most of the world outside America. It’s a perfectly adequate car for most families.
We often see this straw man argument that standardizing on electric cars in the future will make it impossible for people to afford to drive. The Bolt shows there is a future for the economy segment with EVs.
None of those issues have anything whatsoever to do with it being a EV. It’s a GM product deep into the economy price bracket, and you’re complaining about a lack of power seats or cheap sounding door closure? It’s a cheap car, it’s no surprise that cheap cars lack in luxuries.
Being a cheap car is kind of the point though. There are family friendly 4 door EVs in most new car buyers’ price brackets, from cheap hatchbacks to the fastest super cars and almost everything in between.
As a parent, I’d think you would be particularly concerned about the long term impact of carbon emissions. If food is expensive now, what is going to happen to your kids’ quality of life when changing weather makes it impossible to raise food in traditional farming areas? Pretty much every model shows rapidly increasing food prices at best, widespread starvation at worst.
I’m sorry you’re struggling to feed your kids and I’m kinda baffled why you are assuming I have no sympathy for those in a bad spot. Perhaps a better solution would be to push for better government assistance for those who can’t afford food. Loosening carbon regulations to reduce food prices is just kicking the can down the road so the issue will be far worse when your children are adults.
I mean, I don’t think this is such a high bar to pass.
Pregnancy is bad but I’d argue the consequences of 18 years of unwilling parenthood far outstrips the consequences of 9 months of pregnancy. The consequences for those 18 years impact both parties.
Furthermore, men have almost zero agency of what happens in the case of an unintended pregnancy. A man can’t say, “this would ruin my life, I am going to choose not to have the baby.”
That makes the risk quite high for a man, IMO, and the only way to take agency over that risk is male birth control.