danielrpa

Why does the US need to have traditional cities?

I grew up in a high density city overseas and I can see the appeal of both types of city. I personally prefer low density, car centric cities (obviously we need to finish solving the emissions problem from cars, but that's separate).

I'm not criticizing the effort nor being sarcastic: was there any measurable progress by any of the companies working on increasing longevity? I'm talking about actual increase of lifespan, not promising ideas.

25 years

75-80 years late, so wonderful

When I was in college, I used an automated bullshit generator to create some "feedback" (a buzzword on its own!) for an article in a fancy business magazine. These "reader feedback" comments were supposed to be high quality, so they were only accepted by email and were reviewed in-house. My "feedback" was published on their website!

This. Health insurance is indeed quite expensive in the US but, from a self-employment standpoint, it is just a cost like any other. You can get good health insurance for a family of 3 (middle aged parents of a teenager) where I live in the US for around 25k-30k/year, including the out of pocket costs for moderate usage. This is less than rent for said family in a lot of the big US cities.

Nobody wants to "pay rent twice", and it can certainly be a lot harder to stop working when you have a big recurring expense like that, but it's possible to plan for it. Depending on the business you're getting into, it won't be your top expense.

Have in mind that these companies accumulated their position with the support and approval of the state. It's a deal with the devil, even though there aren't any real alternatives under the CCP.

I hate working. There is nothing I want more than to NOT work, which for me means choosing what to do (including nothing) as much as possible.

As many people planning FIRE (Financial Independence Retire Early), I've been working pretty hard - hah! - to maximize my income and meet my goals.

But this is different than the eternal idleness being advocated by some. If you never save enough to be idle, and still expect to consume at normal levels, you are essentially asking others to work for you. Imagine being idle but still playing games, watching TV, reading books; someone had to make the game, film the TV show and write the book, i.e. work, to enable your leisure.

If those working to maintain everybody else agree to arrangement, then it's all ok... This is generally not the case, though.

Isn't internet access at your fingertips a form of transhumanism? So maybe it's ok, people do indeed "know" more in an objective sense.

Texas law is still not dictated by the French as the poster said.

This is so wrong I don't know where to start. I'll just say 2 things:

a) your charts are a classical example of "try hard enough and you will find 2 charts that correlate"

b) Inflation affects the poor because they don't, and sometimes can't, hold assets that traditionally protects the rich from inflation, such as real hard assets (such as real estate) and a sizeable chunk of stocks (some types) and bonds (TIPS and short duration). The poor lives paycheck to paycheck and see their income staying the same while everything else around them is increasing in price.

This is a crime against humanity according to the Article 19 declaration of human rights.

[1] https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity

> When uninhibited, it culminates in riots where sushi restaurants, Japanese cars, buildings with Japanese consulates are torched and demolished.

This is, then, ultimately against the government's interests and thus it is suppressed. The CCP would be completely okay with the torching of Japanese property if it wasn't against the state's economic/diplomatic interests (arguably such property would not even exist if it was against the state's interest).

So let's stop saying the CCP will suppress "pro government" speech.

China is violating fundamental human rights of over a billion people - both Chinese nationals and others abroad who can't speak negatively of China out of fear of repression - on a daily basis due to its heavy curb on freedom of expression. Whatever restrictions western democracies have on expression cannot even begin to approach China's.

China's stance on freedom is a calamity and the magnitude and impact of its state policies is one of the great tragedies in human history.

[1] https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/freedom-expression-f...

Can anyone explain how these people are making money? This is a serious question. It's easy to understand why they want to leave food and hospitality jobs, but are there other industries hiring these workers at higher wages? Are they working at Amazon warehouses?

The company wouldn't hesitate to let you go if it found a hard-to-fix problem with you. So it's ok to leave the company now that you found a hard-to-fix problem with it.

Not every real world concept is fuzzy. Some things are measurable and thus objective within a defined margin of error. For instance: annual income, height, weight, age, chemicals in the blood etc. I'm not saying we should use X or Y for admissions, simply that using non-objective criteria invariably leads to problems like what is described in the article.

I'm a manager and I talk people using teleconferencing apps 6+ hours a day. I like it better than doing it at the office, where I comically have to use the same technology to talk to people in other offices.

I'd rather stay 6+ hours in meetings in more comfortable clothes (loose shorts) and sitting in a more comfortable chair - not to mention the lack of people wanting me to leave the meeting room because of THEIR meeting.

Yes, communication suffers to a certain extent, but occasional visits to the office eliminates the problems with 1:1s you mention. And at least in my experience, this small degradation of in-person communication isn't such a big deal.

So if you surveyed me, I'd say "Please let me stay home!". Also, if IC work is "great to do remotely", I'd rather see my team at peak productivity remotely than indulging any possible desire I could have to talk to them in person. As a manager, I exist to unblock and help my team, so what's best for the team is best for me.

They got one of the worst things in ChromeOS and put it in Windows. I have to use ChromeOS for work and its poor taskbar slows me down every day.

I won't be upgrading for this reason alone. This is not about being used to the old way and not wanting change, it's about not wanting to switch to something that is objectively worse and will make me less productive.

Raspberry Pi, I suppose. But it doesn't feel the same, but the Pi is really underpowered compared to the average phone/computer, while the ZX Spectrum was the most powerful, and only, computer millions could afford.

I thought that our representative system existed exactly so we don't all need to become politicians or have to vote on every issue through direct democracy.

There is hope for software engineers working together to improve access to information instead of, argh, becoming all politicians. That also would be to the detriment of the entire human race which wouldn't have as many software engineers.

One thing the Arduino doesn't quite have is that the ZX machines, while not cutting edge, were quite novel and "high tech".

Most people who have an Arduino also have a supercomputer-phone. But a ZX81 or ZX Spectrum were, at the time, all you could afford and relatively advanced to the point of being amazing for most other people (who didn't own any computer whatsoever).

The ZX Spectrum was my first computer. So many good moments with it... It's hard to describe it for the current generation - if you were there, you know what I mean.

Sir Clive Sinclair had an enormous impact on my life and career. Today is a sad day for me :(

Maybe the comment refers to the changes in gender roles over the past decades. Our society no longer widely accepts the idea that women are fragile and men have the responsibility to protect them.

"Quarter" have other popular usages that are deeply ingrained in American culture. "Quarterback", "Insert a quarter", "This quarter's results were good", "quart" (measurement), "it's a quarter to one" etc. Actual math aside, it's simply a more familiar word.

And the size of this problem, managing the entire human race, is part of why they make so much money. They are in front of a lot of people and extracting value from them.

So it seems that they want to keep the profits while not paying the costs to be in this business. While Facebook does bring some benefits to people, it also does a lot of harm, to the point that I'm not sure it's a net positive to the world (or even if it's possible to have a net positive company in this space).

But you are not required to be under the full rule of the "kings" and "queens". I don't have much problem doing business with a "monarchy" if you want to call it this way. The problem is when all these "monarchies" are reporting to an ultimate absolute ruler you can't escape...

Weaker... According to whom? I particularly use DDG on my personal devices and only occasionally go to Google. Whenever I'm using a machine that use Google as the default, I often go back to DDG to get results unspoiled by the bias pushed by Google's agenda, SEO and paid ads.

But answering your question, it could let the user choose their search engine as part of the onboarding experience while providing a random preselected default.

Much worse famines happened in the past with smaller populations. We can easily feed this many people - perhaps if we didn't spend so much trying to outbomb other fellow humans?

It appears that they don't want it and prefer other terms - pay me and you can use my headlines. We cannot force newspapers to accept Google's headlines-for-clicks system against their will.