I would say Google is buying shovels and selling shoveling services.
212 karma · joined August 12, 2017
Last I was comparing houses in a neighborhood, the houses near a powerline were consistently worth 15k-30k less (3-6% less).
And from what I read, NYC is exceptionally safe for a US city, and London is exceptionally unsafe for a UK city.
By the way, I recently sold an iPhone 8 (through App, but the transfer was in person) and out of 5 potential buyers, all of them asked the same three questions: "Is it on and unlocked?, is it carrier sim-locked?, which is the battery %?".
Let's go with an absurd example: If you multiplied by 5 both the length of red and green stages, I would expect much less accidents per day, but it would obviously also be much more frustrating to move around (and possibly more accidents if the amount of infractions increase because of the frustration). If you divided them by 2, I would expect much more accidents of all kinds.
In this context it could be able to do multiple actions in order to address an ask from the user: read cells, documentation, edit cells, and perhaps even read the result from the edited cell before answering. i.e. "Can you create a new sheet that focuses on the Countries where the sales happened, including YoY differences, and tell me which countries are outliers and for which reason(s)?" (probably very far fetched given the level of progress Excel has achieved in 20 years).
I understand your frustration. I had to dig quite a bit to find numbers I could use, because there are multiple energy categories that are used inconsistently: solar&wind, all renewables, non-fossil. Then they are combined with two main ways of measuring them: capacity and average production. Then there are targets, predictions and in-production. It is a nightmare to get fair 1:1 comparisons.
I am also not clear that it is that much more ambitious. You are not comparing the correct numbers. 1200 GW in 2030 is just solar and wind, they are targeting 3.9TW renewables by 2030 and 80% non-fossil by 2060.
I moved in 2020 and it has been the best decision I could have made. Taking into account everything (savings rate, safety, working hours, job security, politics, closeness to my home country in Europe) it is the best place I could be by far.
All other places trade off too much in exchange of something else. For example, I would have better savings rate in California (maybe 60-100k instead of 30-50k a year), but it would be worse in every other metric, except perhaps weather, although I dislike hot weather.
Or just build their 6th mansion that uses a plot of land that could fit 400 apartments, keeping the people underneath them commuting 1 hour from their 80 square meter apartment.
They obviously often know each other, but as far as I known, they have never found them being explicit accomplices.
Instead, I expect those buildings to invest in having the fastest, most stable internet connection with added redundancy and everything will be fully centralized in datacenters.
Even more if the system worked in a centralized way: this email/phone is used exclusively by a kid, so now all on-boarded companies must delete their accounts and not allow them to register again.
I had to look at over 20 studios that built my favorite games in 1990-2010 to find those 3. And ID Software had the drama with Mick Gordon, for which I am quite angry at them, I hate Valve's focus on boxes in multiplayer games, and FromSoftware cares too little about hacks and in general don't provide a PC experience up to what I would expect considering the general quality of their games.
So yeah, I only know of indie or very new studios that are building pure, clean, fun games nowadays.