zdean

"What must it be like to be on the receiving end of such paternalism? It sounds awful. And horrifically damaging."

Is "paternalism" in this case a euphemism for centuries of slavery, legal segregation, and general racism? Because, yes, that can be horrifically damaging to people.

1) this isn't money you earn from Amazon...so they're not creating a closed amusement park style ecosystem where you HAVE to spend the money you make with them

2) you don't have to convert ALL of your cash into Amazon credit. You can allocate a portion that is useful to find cheaper/better selection of products on Amazon. They rest you can spend wherever/whenever you want

You're absolutely right. Except that I said 2 data points and then waiting to see if there are more...in which case you would be able to argue for a reliable trend.

Well, that gives you two solid data points...a few more and you've got a pretty reliable trend to explain that burn rate and wasted meals.

As a reference example, Rockefeller was worth over $300 billion in 2007 dollars:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Rockefeller&oq=Rockefeller&a...

I applaud you for having the foresight to save up for your kids' education. At the same time, I think it's naive to say that the only reason people are cash poor (or even the primary reason) is because they buy flat screen TVs and new cars.

"The only situation I've seen where that's remotely true is applying for student aid where if you're parents saved money they're expected to pony it up, but if they spent it all on flat screen TVs and new cars (and hence are "cash poor") they're not expected to do so."

Are you suggesting that everyone falls into this (false?) binary?

Would this be considered Augmented Virtual Reality?

That. And not to forget that many of the countries that are left over are the failed attempt to have different ethnic/cultural groups exist under one umbrella (USSR, Czechoslovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Yugoslavia)...not unlike the pressure in places like Iraq, Syria, etc that we see today.

Because making it possible for ethnically/racially/culturally diverse groups to live happily together is and has historically been a major challenge. So a country that has immigration policies that promote homogeneity will avoid many of those challenges. It's certainly not the only factor...but I can't imagine that it doesn't play a major role.

I wonder if the lack of ethnic diversity in the "happier" countries is a contributing factor:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16...

I think your analogy is incorrect with regards to doctors (since we're talking about action, not inaction). A clearer one might be: is the doctor who saves the life of a murderer, rapist, etc a wrong for doing so. We say "no she isn't" because she's absolved of responsibility for that decision by her medical oath...if she wants to remain doctoring, she HAS to offer her services without regard to the who the person is. In the case of the programmer, there's no such (legal) obligation.

Serious question for those who are pro-tipping...where do you draw the line? How do you choose which products/services are tip-worthy and which aren't?

They have a fantastic youtube channel as well:

https://www.youtube.com/user/keralatourism/featured

And one of my favorite videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE8sc2932Js&t=13s

Wouldn't mathematics simply be considered an epistemological branch of philosophy?

Couldn't a genetic comparison give us an estimate of how long ago the 2 lines split?

Isn't that kind of like saying that a runner doesn't deserve credit for her win because the other people in the race ran slower than she did?

That's Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef)

The AMA controls the requirements for licensing, the schools that can educate for the purpose of licensing, and the number of licenses that can be issued. Exactly what is intellectually dishonest about calling that a monopoly?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2007/09/a_spoonf...

MDs also have the benefit of an artificial monopoly (vs factory workers) that I imagine will fight hard to keep its members employed.

https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/medical-mo...

For what could be built in Antarctica in 1903, I bet it was state of the art. In 2015, the Shanghai Tower was built...it doesn't make what they're building in Antarctica today any less state of the art just because it's relatively less ambitious in scale.

I'm not sure your observation precludes mine (or vice-versa). I can definitely see how they probably riffed on the unveiling (considering the comma)...but the structure very much follows what I pointed out: "Make <something> <descriptor> again"

"For years afterwards...nothing much fancier than wooden huts went up on the white continent."

I think that in 1903, that wooden hut would be thought of as pretty fancy and state of the art. Only in retrospect 114 years later would it seem quaint.

Perhaps. But to ignore them is to be tone-deaf for the sake of a marketing gimmick.

I'm starting to see quite a few brands co-opting the President-elect's signature slogan like they have here. This baffles me. On the one hand, yes, it's a slogan that pretty much every (at least) American knows and is familiar with. On the other hand, there's some very significant portion of the population that is very viscerally offended (at the least) by the President-elect. So to jump on that wagon, you risk very strongly offending and alienating a large portion of the population along a line that has nothing to do with whether or not they'd be you consumer...but with which way their political beliefs fall.

My comment isn't meant to be a judgement call on whether or not doing this is normalizing something distasteful...it's simply meant to point out that OWC like many other brands may be shooting themselves in the foot over a lazy and reactionary marketing gimmick.

I wonder how many people opt for the higher density assuming it'll make a significant difference without really knowing what the visual threshold for being able to see a noticeable difference is.

Yeah, but I would think there's a corner of the market that TM doesn't have yet...maybe the really small venues. Start with those as MVP/proof of concept and then "wow" the medium venues, repeat.

"It is a testament to our weak antitrust laws that Ticketmaster has been able to gouge the public for decades with no repercussions whatsoever."

Genuinely interested to know what is keeping a nimble new startup from stepping in and blowing this up.

In America (and I may be biased b/c my kids say it all the time) to toot means to blow your car horn...but it also means to fart. If I say "I tooted this morning," most people will assume I farted. You might want to reconsider that one.

If the end justifies the means, then I think it's irrelevant whether the change causes demand to be met so long as more people get the organs they need. On the other hand, if you don't believe that the end justifies the means, then it's completely irrelevant because you have to respect people's choices over their bodies (even posthumously) even if you think they are misguided or 'selfish'.