I dont think its unreasonable to want very safe buildings but clear that by the rules staying the same means they are using a different risk calculation then when they were created.
2,079 karma · joined August 4, 2020
I dont think its unreasonable to want very safe buildings but clear that by the rules staying the same means they are using a different risk calculation then when they were created.
CNN has a liberal audience. If they ran multiple headlines on this (whether automated or just articles written by different editors) I'm sure the one that paints Rittenhouse as without any justification will get more clicks. And therefore its more likely those writers will be promoted internally based on performance + those who are covering the story will continue to cover the story instead of moving to something else.
Look at a site like Reddit. It takes user submitted headlines for news stories. And depending on the subreddit the headliens will always skew one way politically without the need for money dictating things.
In places like Colorado there is very cheap land that is not very good for farming about an hour away from Denver and it certainly seems like it would be cost + energy efficient to build out there instead of up.
The biggest increases in expenditures are specialists for children with speech problems, reading problems, learning disabilities etc. as professions like speech language pathologists usually earn considerably more than teachers and the number of them within any school has increased considerable too. I'm not making a value judgement - that's just where the money is going.
I am confused by this, though I'm pretty sure it is the author who is intentionally combining verbage though?
The link this post connects to is about how people submit their own photos/videos of porch thieves + suspicious people to the police. You could argue this is bad on its own but certainly not what "massive warrantless surveillance" invokes. Everyone reading that line without scrutiny will assume it means police departments are somehow watching your own Ring without permission.
Also doesn't capture in the the unequalness of gains. Which is better - the fed doing something that has 90% chance of huge gains or a 10% chance of catastrophic economy shattering loss? Or an 80% chance of huge gains and a 20% chance of gains netting 0? The first is much more desirable if maximizing a bonus and could be tempting - but I dont think we want that risk.
I've lived in really old buildings. Even if the bricks on the outside were over 100 years old it was extremely expensive to update the air conditioning and windows to be a good living experience. Why take such a superficial view of what is "built to last" just because the outside stays the same? Best case scenario for a long last building is a ship of theseus situation. And while it may be cost efficient for historic college campuses to renovate their old buildings continuously, chances are this not applicable to random middle class homeowners.
I like nice cars but I dont insist that everyone drive a European sports car just because it would be aesthetically more pleasing. Ultimately, a city/town will be better off if people can spend 20% of their income on housing instead of 50%. Not just because they are selfish or short-sighted but because they can actually use the additional resources on things for themselves, their family, and their community.
When you are very wealthy you can have both but for those without that much money I don't blame anyone for choosing functionality over the aesthetics of a neighborhood. It seems rather insane to me to insist that your neighbor must increase their budget 20 or 40 percent (perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars) just so your house can be a couple percentage points more desirable.
Wealth increased 50% from March 13th, 2020 - but the stock market decreased 25% from February 2020 to March 2020. Since February 2020 to now the stock market has increased about 32%, which is a lot for 18 months but not a crazy amount especially given a bit higher than average inflation.
I think that's fair but the nonetheless the only houses on here in San Mateo for under 600k are about 600sq ft. Even 1200sqft homes are 1M+ Where do you think married mid-level engineers are going to live?
For 500k in Austin you can choose between brand new 1300 sqft homes or older 2500 sqft homes.
https://www.trulia.com/TX/Austin/
https://www.trulia.com/CA/Palo_Alto/
Texas also doesnt have prop 13 so it is unlikely to ever reach the levels of a California city
That being said the scale is a bit weird. #4 is "serious damage to revenue" and #5 is "Resignations at the top like Uber". It seems like #5 could happen without 4 and visa versa. I know Uber's brand is not great but seems like Dara taking over was probably good for both short term and long term revenue.
The headline could also be written as "Over half of FB employees believe that only tech reporters interested/minor dip"
I listen to a podcast on football. Are they allowed to run ads that are about sports betting and NFL tickets? That is personalized to the group. Is Facebook allowed to run ads for sports betting to all people who are fans of a professional team on their site?
Is Facebook not allowed to run me ads for local restaurants any more?
It did ok on reddit (100 upvotes) but a few thousands upvotes on Imgur and made the front page with hundreds of thousands of views. I was shocked since I didn't even know that was a thing. But my guess is popular with people who are on their phone a lot, are not as tech saavy, or international.
However, this is not as true for crypto. If I steal 5M from your account and put it into mine then you can't get the money back if I don't give up the key. And, while the state will personally arrest you, they are going to be a lot less likely/able to recoup any crypto.
It isn't Ring's fault that domestic violence is messy and sometimes even video isn't enough to settle disputes when looked at by a third-party. The same argument against Ring (aka often times they don't lead to arrests) could be used for getting rid of motion detectors, calls to the police, or witness testimony altogether. If the standard is perfection then nothing is helpful (including costly social services calls which seems to be the subtext) but its clear a patchwork can be helpful.
Perhaps my needs are different than others but I personally find it truly amazing. The one time I tried ordering something off Wal-Mart it came three days late and returning it was a nightmare.
I think its a bit worse to pay for dates/access which is the entire premise of dating apps, matchmakers, clubs etc. because those dont have a vested interest in helping you find anything long and successful. In fact, its the opposite.
If your view is that a CEO of a social media company should be held liable that really need its own op-ed, not a single sentence. I find it impossible to believe that one could think the reason the CEO of a social media site is not being charged is due to their gender. No one has been held liable (no publisher, writer, etc.) for vaccine misinfo. Its a complete garbage argument that undermines other legitimate claims of sexism in SV
Someone else could explain better but I'm also fairly sure many of the new rules here (such as exempting CEQA) also apply to SFH. They just leave the current rules untouched for commercial/large-scale residential.