mitigating

Would it be similar to if I wrote an article saying I'm 10ft tall?

wouldn't that mean the cause of the increased crime is either criminals who are angry at the police so they commit more crimes or the police not working as hard (or a combination)

Smoking is addictive. This makes it more difficult for a person to change their behavior compared to exercising more, eating healthy, and driving better (I'm assuming you meant people who drive poorly?)

They are in no way comparable because if an area in a map is blurred I know the information is restricted.

"builds an easy win for opposition by demonstrably doing nothing of substance "

It has some effect and if you want a big change sometimes it's better to start small. For example, if you wanted to get in shape you start by running a small distance.

"In other words it serves only to be divisive and give an opportunity for people to have strong opinions about something irrelevant; which is actually the point of much of politics, cement your support base by getting people riled up about inconsequential and thus risk free issues."

This is even more disturbing; you think that people on the left (and yes I'm just going to name the sides here) want to help the environment solely to anger the right? I have never met anyone who cares about the environment admitting to me their only and true motive is to anger the opposition.

Is the reason you think this because that's your motive? For example "owning the libs". It is because you can't possibility be wrong about environmental policies that the other side must have another motive?

Do pickup truck owners roll coal on cyclists because they think cyclists are out there riding just to shove that fact in their face? That they are putting all that physical effort as virtue signaling?

I would do 10 hours day for Friday off. Working an extra two hours doesn't put a huge strain as you are already at work or in the work mode. During crunch time I would end up working until 21:00 to 22:00 and I felt it was like exercise in that as long as you don't stop it's not as bad.

You also avoid commute overhead if you work from the office.

Everyone is a new person to someone

I always have this thought when seeing black and white photographs from the 70s onwards. Every photo from my family starting in 1977+ is color.

Someone in film told me black and white does offer better detail in analog as color saturation can sometimes blur lines. They also told me that as a student they filmed in black and white since in color every object in the scene can mean more because of its. Like if you had a normal 80s bedroom but just one pillow on the bed was red then that could imply something even if you didn't mean to (maybe romance, not sure).

No, you have to be interested in something. Caring implies that you have an emotional desire for the hypothesis to be either true or false and that leads to bias. Scientific interest drives motivation.

Do you think a person who is stealing catalytic converters thinks like that? They already could get crushed by the car and don't seem to care. You are the only one in the situation who thought it through and still made the decision to end a life, you are a sociopath.

The Tesla Model 3 LR battery weighs 1060 pounds and can only be removed from the car as a single unit.

What if corporations are acting against the public good the majority of the time and there aren't alternative methods of stopping this (boycotts don't work etc).

It's better to ban it since it's mostly evil.

Recommending against anything because it didn't work for you isn't good, even with the disclaimer. Antidotal evidence is the worst.

Do you have proof of anything you state in your first paragraph?

This is an excellent point. A dislike value is a single number but represents a large variety of reasons, only some might relevant to if you would think the video is good, and you don't know the breakdown.

Isn't that similar because the dislike value isn't related to the specific video but a person's opinion of the brand.

For example if you wanted to watch a video on how to setup WSL 2 on Windows 10 and you see one by Microsoft has 100000 dislikes however it's amazing video that doesn't help you.

Maybe he meant to say freeloader while complaining or blocking the ads.

How is the title misleading?

It links directly to intel and tells you that you can use the scroll lock to stop the crashes.

If the title said "Enable scroll lock to disable e-cores" that doesn't tell you why you would need to do that.

Amazon does offer recommendations based on an algorithm while a book store either has similar books all in one section ordered in a more traditional fashion (maybe alphabetical).

Does that monopoly result in increased cost for the customer? I assume there is harm to the general economy the problem is quantifying that and also convincing people to pay more for something.

There's some percentage of people that always want to pay the lowest price and if the product turns out to be fake they return it. Say you order 100 things over a month and 5% turn out to be fake the only cost is time (Amazon pays for shipping if the product is fake I believe). That's compared to paying 10% more on every product plus the time it takes to go to the store.

Don't they often argue that government handouts are what prevent people from finding jobs, innovating, or moving to an area with jobs.

I don't think it's too hypocritical to accept government handouts because you need it while at the same time wishing you had a job so you didn't have to take handouts

However not everyone feels that way and they use a very broad stroke when it comes to Government assistance which was referred to by some as "socialism" and later "communism"

So people move to rural areas because it's cheaper and it's only cheaper because utilities are subsidized?

And I like that you understand that choice and cost. I don't like the concept that tax dollars should be used to pay for the extremely high cost of electricity and other utilities for a small number of people to keep rural living costs low.

Is it high compared meaning they are making a huge profit or that people can't afford it? If it really does that cost much then subsidies are possible. However it seems some people live in rural areas to save money, you hear about that often here where people would post something like "I moved to the woods in North Dakota and only pay $500 a month" is it fair to then use tax money to help keep that price low?

That's not how science works, nothing is ever settled.

Then people will just complain it's sudden when it gets close to the deadline.

I looked into the cost of flight lessons in a small plane, the cost of using an airport runway, and fuel. It was extremely expensive to me and I make 6 figures.

I think deciding if something is unjust should factor in the impact. If someone has a 1990 Honda Civic that is their only means of getting to work and suddenly it's illegal due to pollution that's one thing. However if someone's private jet needs an expensive upgrade then that's another impact.

Sometimes it's not how smart you are but if you can utilize that. Many people can't afford higher education, especially from rural areas, there's also stereotypes based on accents and mannerisms that could prevent growth at a company. People in rural areas are also farther away from large companies and may be unable/unwilling to move.