praxulus

The occupy movement had a leader?

The first category in the "education" section is a list of the five best novels set in boarding schools. I don't think they're suggesting that reading those books will make you an expert on how to operate/regulate/attend a boarding school.

It's just a bunch of lists of good books for people looking for something to read, arranged by subject. There's nothing wrong with that.

Most Americans already have electric stoves, and its disproportionately higher income people who still cook with gas.

I know this is all based more on vibes than facts though.

If anything free education allows you to raise your standards. The group of applicants who are academically qualified should be strictly larger than the group that's both academically qualified and willing to pay tuition. With a larger pool of qualified applicants you can afford to reject more of them.

(Caveat: This doesn't work if the point of your university is mostly to signal that its graduates came from a family wealthy enough to send them to your university.)

I live in Seattle, not San Francisco, but we have some similar issues with our schools. I'd really prefer to send my son to our local public schools, but if they aren't challenging him appropriately then my wife and I obviously aren't going to just give up on his education. We'll either pay for extracurricular enrichment like the person in this article, move to a wealthy suburb, or send him to a private school instead.

That's a much worse outcome from an equity lens, but there's only so much you can expect people to voluntarily sacrifice for the greater good. Asking higher income parents to risk their children's future is a lot.

I guess you could call Uranium nuclei star fossils?

What do you suggest we do instead?

>Dr Spiegel says that encouraging patients to get plenty of sleep before and after a vaccination appointment is an ideal way for a medical system to maximise its vaccine stock and ensure that the benefits granted are as large as possible.

They don't limit their recommendation to only men, all patients should be encouraged to get plenty of sleep.

What on earth are you talking about?

My wife is my productivity assistant. It works great.

Since COVID started we've had our desks next to each other, and even though she's not constantly checking on me, I know she can see if I'm just wasting time. On days where she's not working, or if one of us moves to another room to take a call, my productivity falls off a cliff.

Which alternative is less dystopian?

* Clearcut wilderness to build more suburban homes

* Don't build more homes, just stuff more people into existing homes

* Let the excess population live in cars or on the sidewalk

* Cull the excess population

Net metering just doesn't make sense though. Everyone who wants to rely on the grid for power availability ought to pay for grid upkeep costs. Net metering would make sense if it came on top of a baseline "connectivity fee" that covered grid maintenance, but that's not the current policy, would likely be politically infeasible, and would hurt rooftop solar customers financially anyway.

Subsidizing solar is a perfectly good policy choice, but net metering is ultimately an unsustainable way to implement it.

So did my parents. I'm going to be a father any day now, and you can be sure I'll do the same.

I don't see how it's "fair" that I was born to hardworking, financially responsible parents, while most others were less lucky though.

Of course it's unfair. It's the definition of unequal opportunity.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's immoral or should be illegal, but how could you argue that it's fair that some people get free money while others don't by the luck of their birth?

It'd be great if google offered an option for a video call with a reviewer for $500/hr as an escalation option for businesses who are getting nowhere with the regular process. Ideally you'd get a refund if you turned out to be correct, but I'd be happy even without that.

I would much prefer an explicit data cap known ahead of time to random unexpected throttling.

The interesting thing for me has been the completely unintentional collapse in gaming time as I've gotten older. I was borderline addicted to games in high school, but the low barrier to in-person socializing in college, followed by relationships and rising interest in other hobbies has made video games something I have to actively choose to spend time on. Now I'm expecting a kid and even if my free time doesn't completely evaporate, I'm guessing my gaming time will.

It's weird because I still think of myself as a "gamer", but I realized I've spent almost as much time building and tinkering with my current PC as I have actually playing games on it.

The evidence includes the actual record of rising temperatures, rising CO2 levels, and laboratory experiments that confirm that the greenhouse effect exists. None of those are just models.

I'm extremely surprised that even a single scientific paper predicted the demise of the species due to climate change within a few years. Could you point me to such a thing?

Google is already in the payments business, which requires a significant amount of identity verification. They aren't at the level you're describing, but they're also not completely new to the business of verifying IDs, albeit via uploaded photographs rather than physical kiosks.

Not really. Also using words in a different way than everyone else doesn't make you insightful, it makes you a bad communicator.

>When people talk about the "reliability" of EVs

I haven never heard of somebody talking about the "reliability" of a car, or any other durable good, in reference to the reliability of its supply chain. Saying that a product has a fragile supply chain is not a valid counterargument to somebody touting its reliability.

"EVs have an especially fragile supply chain" could be a true statement on its own, but "EVs have a fragile supply chain, therefore they're unreliable" is only true if we use a different definition of "reliability" than people typically use in the context you gave.

Maybe this would just make me a bad service admin, but if I believed that I would be literally saving someone's life by sharing data from one of my users with law enforcement, I would be hard pressed to hold their privacy above another's life.

Exactly what it takes to be reasonably convinced that I would be saving someone's life is of course not a simple question, but in at least some situations it seems like it would be worth the tradeoff.

...yes.

Well, it's not the only issue. Without GPS tracking or bike registries bike theft is legitimately a very hard problem for police to deal with, so they're used to relying entirely on getting cyclists to use better locks.

The situation has changed though, and they certainly deserve criticism for failing to change their attitude.

If you have a charged ebike, it ought to be easy to charge your phone.

There are still other problems with that approach. VanMoof currently lets you unlock your phone with your bike, rather than requiring a constant connection, which seems like the right balance.

I'm rich, the police still didn't do anything when someone broke into my car.

Regulations so strict that nobody subjects themselves to them don't reduce the harm done to workers.

Of course relaxing our regulations is not the only solution here, we could go all-in and enforce our labor laws on any ship that wants to dock at an American port. Regardless, the status quo isn't doing anything to reduce harm.

It's definitely immoral for a city to have laws that make it impossible for working class people to live there (e.g. a suburb with moderately expensive land that bans multifamily housing and has large minimum lot sizes).

Whether it's immoral on an individual level to move to such a city is debatable. It's not unreasonable to want to raise your children in a community with low crime and good schools. On the other hand you could argue that choosing to move to a city with immoral laws is itself a way of supporting those laws, and in doing so you become partially responsible for their outcomes.

They don't actually have the ability to pass general bills without Republican support though. Outside of budget reconciliation, neither party has had the power to pass legislation without at least some bipartisan support since Ted Kennedy was replaced in 2010.

I agree that not allowing savings for a mortgage probably isn't a huge issue in practice, but discouraging saving in general is completely bonkers policy.

Some people prefer remote teams, some people prefer in-person teams.

I don't know anyone who likes hybrid teams though.

Eventually I suspect we'll end up with a mix of remote and in-person employers, and workers who have a strong preference one way or another will just have to filter potential employers accordingly. There might be a way for larger businesses to have certain teams work remotely while others go into the office, but I suspect it would be difficult to manage.