PraetorianGourd

Because what is the difference between a remote worker in Kansas vs. a remote worker in Bogota, apart from 80,000 USD / Year?

If this is the case, why is Tesla the outlier? Ford, Hyundai, GM etc. all seem to be able to accurately estimate range. In fact, as the article mentions, Hyundai is slightly inaccurate in the opposite direction (though not by the same margin as Tesla over-estimates).

If this is simply people getting used to a new technology, wouldn't it be a similar story across the board?

I always wonder why the truth gets buried. What I said was accurate, but it does go against several popular narratives. Nobody wants nuance, but these things are entirely comprised of nuance.

A majority of Americans still have access to abortion that is _less_ restrictive than most EU countries. The Supreme Court did not outlaw abortion. In my state, abortions can be legally performed right up until birth.

“Towels around their heads” is derogatory and offensive phrasing. Please refrain from that language.

It is concerning to me to center science on what are "the problems of our time". Take "infectious diseases", I doubt that topic would have been included in 2019. Of course COVID changed what is a problem of our time. But what is next? If there is a nuclear incident, does nuclear physics become the problem of our time? If a startup clones humans, does genetic research become the problem of our time?

Teach the fundamentals, give students the tools to asses for themselves what the problems are, and how to best approach understanding them.

It seems to me that there are a few caveats that may explain this.

The first is that the blurb covers _furnishing_ the archival/photocopy, not creating the copy itself. This is more akin to whether I can give a friend a copy of a book I purchased, as opposed to the act of photocopying it myself. That is to say, it is okay to provide a photocopied version of a copyrighted document, but only under certain usage circumstances as defined by fair use doctrine.

The other aspect may simply be laziness. Perhaps it could be read as:

> [institutions such as] libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction

Either way, I think "requires libraries to lie" is a bit sensationalist.

The author of this piece, who seems to primarily write about Return to Office, runs a consulting firm on “the future of work”. So no doubt his opinions are rooted in sound research and not a vested interest in selling books and consulting on the future of work.

I don’t think that this automatically disqualifies his opinion, but the onus is on him to avoid the perception of ulterior motives, which he didn’t do.

Your comment itself carried implications. “Some of us think…” is aggressive, and it contrasts the “enlightened” view against others. And you assume that the OP was ignoring those deaths, when they simply said it isn’t at the forefront of their mind.

I was contrasting your admonishment of the OP against the millions of deaths that you, presumably, “ignore”. The thesis is, why is it that COVID is hard to ignore while the totality of all other causes of death are more easily ignored?

My point was, you and me and everyone ignores deaths to some extent all the time. And you were so sure of your righteousness that you had to reply showing the world how refined and caring you are.

3.4 million people die every year in the US. What makes these deaths acceptable but COVID a tragedy? And yes, many of those 3.4 million are preventable.

They should have never used “permanent” or “forever”. New leaders come in, old leaders go out. Realities change. Should every subsequent CEO be bound by some promise of a prior CEO? Seems unsustainable.

I would want to see the data by income or other socioeconomic factors, in addition to race.

And it can still be racism in that racism explains economic disparity to a degree. My intent isn’t to absolve racism from being primarily responsible.

I wonder if there has been any research into what motivates an officer to approach a traffic stop in a specific way. I don’t want to jump straight to racism because not every encounter with a Black motorist included the more aggressive posturing.

When I’ve been pulled over, the officer spends some time in their car, I assume running my plates and the such. Perhaps past convictions or warrants influence the tone of subsequent interactions? Even so, it seems a good standard would be to always immediately mention the reason for the stop.

The “False” before every explanation is so incredibly off-putting. I think the site would be more effective if the explanations were just the explanation. The title has “fallacy”, no need to repeat that these assumptions are not true.

SVB was essentially a social-media fueled bank run, and it took out FRC as well. They were both vulnerable to a run in ways that should not be allowed, but the fact remains both would be solvent still had the rumor-mill not sunk them.

Instead of fighting for what, in terms of the lost deposits, is a drop in the bucket, how about we fight to again separate investment from commercial banking?

It is not now banned, it is scheduled to be banned in January 2024.

Money? Power? Ego? He is entirely capable of making his own decisions.

I want to assume best intention, but you have absolutely no reason to believe he was “thinking with his dick”. That is a rather sophomoric take.

But it does have cultural significance. Filipino dishes are served with a fork and a spoon, not with a knife as is common in the west, or chopsticks as in some other Asian cultures. It is a very culturally specific thing, and something that hopefully is written somewhere. If not, maybe this little conversation will do the trick and be referenced ages from now

A mixture of:

1. The home being in a state of disrepair such that most lenders won’t fund a mortgage

2. Being located in a region where the local economy can’t support high home prices

3. Because of the lack of desirability, a lack of speculative investment.

I agree that vaccines are probably the single biggest achievement in the history of science. But refusal to be vaccinated is a lot more nuanced than simply anti-vax lies. For example, the lower rate among Black Americans can be directly traced to medical experimentation and a distrust of governmental edicts, which is entirely fair considering the history.

The United States had some of the highest vaccine acceptance rates, with the two most effective vaccines being the vast majority of doses given. The EU had 72%, USA had 69%. Not enough of a difference to attribute differing guidance to.

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

People should have been and to adapt to the need to fight off COVID. 1. Wear a respirator. 2. Live a healthy lifestyle to avoid obesity and chronic health conditions so the body is better and to fight off infection.

See? Being a twat is easy. Actually having a bit of compassion is the hard part.

No, the point is that we all collectively shit ourselves over COVID, absolutely turning society upside-down. But we shrug at so many other existential threats because they are already by accounted for (like traffic fatalities) or happens to “someone else” (like drug dependency).

COVID was dangerous, and ignoring it completely wasn’t an option. But it is a reasonable rhetorical gambit to wonder why we responded to COVID so aggressively while ignoring other risks and threats.

No, that isn’t the case. The article did not try to imply that green energy is to blame.

But let’s pretend it did, is that not a perspective we should analyze? If we are going to actively restrict sources of energy, we should quantify the externalities. Not to convince anyone that we shouldn’t take those steps, but because these are real trade-offs with real costs. I’m sure that someone who earnestly feels that climate change is an immediate existential threat would welcome the analysis.

Does COVID impact Europeans differently? The European equivalent to the CDC does not recommend additional boosters to those under 60[0].

I get this is a still novel virus but the divergence in guidance gives me pause, and I think that it is reasonable to step back and consider the bigger picture.

[0] https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/news-events/ecdc-and-ema-updat...

I want a progressive, inclusive society. I want a society that argues and fights for actual change, not just changing word usage. I bristle at the “master vs. main” debate not because I’m racist, but because it distracts from real impactful change. Every second spent arguing over whether “master” has meaning outside a slavery context is a second NOT spent on expanding educational equity or progressive taxation. The people who are benefiting from the status quo want us fighting over the dictionary.

Right in the most literal interpretation of the term, there is alignment. In other news, I can’t believe the yearbook committee wanted to take mugshots of my kid!

As you can see, there is what something colloquially means, and what something literally means. But I know you know that

So not mug shots. Using dramatic language ruins your argument when reality doesn’t live up to the drama.

This is super useful, but the font betrays that usefulness. The "fun" font is reasonable for titles but for the content, I would stick with a readable sans-serif font, or a monospace for code snippets.

I don't mean to be negative, but that is an impediment to me using it