CubsFan1060

I'm not sure how exactly you're drawing that parallel, but, IMHO, that would be just fine. I suspect people would speed a lot less.

I think the eventual plan might be this? https://textual.textualize.io/blog/2023/09/06/what-is-textua...

I am going to bet the answer to your question is "No"

Your first sentence is incorrect. Monopolies are not illegal.

From the press conference this morning: "It is not illegal to hold a monopoly, Garland said. "

"That may sound counterintuitive in a case intended to fight monopolies. But under US antitrust law, it is only illegal when a monopolist resorts to anticompetitive tactics, or harms competition, in an effort to maintain that monopoly."

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-news/doj-apple-antitrust-l...

Looks like the repo is archived and they aren’t working on it anymore?

Not that I disagree with your first statement, but would you also say that consumers are taking advantage of the drivers?

Can you help me out with the money here? I was curious, so I went and looked.

https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-det...

It looks like they made approximately 1.4 billion, with a gross bookings of around 37.5 billion. That would _seem_ to mean that drivers would get an increase of approximately 3% of the full booking price if Uber was a nonprofit?

Best I could find is that there are about 5.4 million drivers worldwide. So if Uber's profit was distributed evenly, each would get about $264/quarter? Without knowing hours driven, I'm not sure what all that boils down to. I suspect it doesn't factor in idle time, without rides.

Can you talk a little bit about how you came up with "easily afford to pay their workers minimum wage"?

If your app is ad-supported, you pay 0%. It also makes the freemium model viable. If you have an application that has in-app purchases, then people may download, play the free portion, and never pay you. If you have to pay $0.50 for that, then it may not go well.

The 0.50 is probably much better if you're selling, say, a $10 app.

The core technology fee doesn't exist on the Mac.

Is there any control over the routing of the edges?

I'm sure they could pass laws to make these things possible.

Assuming that these ideals are correct, I'd think that new device makers would pop up to satisfy these markets. I think something similar has happened with Huawei in China. The EU is going hard after FAANG, but if they all pulled out, does the EU have anything that can replace them?

Edit: Actually, Fairphone is a great example. I think it's the sort of thing that satisfies all the ideals that the EU is trying to get to.

And I'm completely tired of the "I am going to buy a well known item, with a well known feature set, and then later complain about all of this". YOU are enabling the shitty practices by giving them money in the first place. People need to take personal responsibility. If it's important to you, take a stand BEFORE you give your money to said person.

There's no scam here. Everything is VERY well known.

Right. So, when the person bought the item, the expectation was that Apple's App Store was the only option. Now, there is an additional option, while in the the EU. So the feature set when the person bought the phone is the same, and there is now a new added ability.

What would be available for phones and laptops in this scenario? The FairPhone, System 76 laptop... what are the other options? (Assuming you also mean Microsoft)

I'm confused at the scenario you are presenting. So in this case, you travel out of the EU, but are installing a taxi app from a non-eu country, but the app is only available in the EU?

It.. doesn't bother me. But none of this is different than when said person spent a thousand dollars. If this is the sort of thing that annoys you, you should probably have bought a different device in the first place.

They don't lose access to the apps. I suspect the phone itself is what disables it, not sending the location to Apple.

I thought that you couldn't subscribe to Spotify via the App. Am I wrong?

Seems like this is somewhat our culture.

Not wearing a mask has zero impact on the person already sick. Them wearing a mask is 100% about being nice to others. There is no benefit to them.

It's interesting that you phrase it that way. I'd phrase it as being courteous to other folks. When I'm sick I don't want to make anyone else feel poor for several days. I guess what you see as neurotic, I simply see as kindness.

I don't think this needs to be absolutes. Properly fitted N95 > N95 > Surgical > none.

If sick people work an average N95/KN95 mask off of Amazon (which is the 'good' I was referring to), it'd help. It's not perfect, and you can do better, and you can do worse. But it's a reasonable intersection of "easy to do" and "effective".

I still don't want to get the flu :(

I wish we could have a culture of "wear a (good) mask when you're sick". I don't think I'm going to die from the Flu or Covid, but it is going to make life miserable for awhile.

I think something like this is really on people. It isn't really hard to use your same bag hundreds of times. It also isn't hard to just not use a bag (I regularly just wheel items out to the car, put them in a box I have there, then take the box inside).

If individuals can't be bothered with simple things like this, is there really any hope that any law will help?

I'm going to guess you might be young? People in my neighborhood have owned their houses for decades. Are you saying that someone buying a house in 1988 should have foreseen all the changes in the following 35 years?

"Everyone is different"

I think this is the root of it. You prefer higher density -- and that's great. I'm sure not everyone agrees, but I don't see any reason to take that away. In fact, I think it should be encouraged for those that like it.

The issue, IMHO, is that some folks don't like that and prefer lower density. And a lot of these changes focus on taking that away from them (i.e. changing their current neighborhood).

Also, just a comment on: "It has to create more car dependence and social isolation"

I don't think that's true. I live in a pretty traditional SFH neighborhood. Within a 12 minute bike ride, I have:

* Four grocery stores (Major chains)

* 2 gyms

* Dozens of restaurants

* Several large parks

* 2 home improvement stores

* Several large employers

* Several (non-Starbucks) coffee shops

And lots more. It's certainly possible, with bikes, to have SFH neighborhoods where cars aren't required.

I see you are getting downvoted, but I think you are right.

People spend a lot of money finding a neighborhood and home they like. If you build next to a huge open field, you need to assume it could become anything. But if you build in a neighborhood that is built out, you like the feel of, and then it suddenly changes... that's a scary prospect.

You can also migrate it using logical replication.

I think the author is being far too harsh. It most certainly isn't phone quality. It most certainly is a good enough quality to do most tasks. Eating, drinking, making coffee, etc... all work perfectly fine. Fine detail is less good (reading my phone is difficult but not impossible). All things considered, they probably aren't as good as they were sold, but they are still pretty amazing.

I think this is right. I think that 6-12 months from now this is going to be a very different story.

Same on iPhone. I assume they only allow typing on languages that use the same character set?