nebolo

But MBB is different.

The efficiency of modern cold-climate heat pumps plummets to 200-300% at 40F and perhaps 175% at 5F.

Not to be pedantic (ok a little bit), but you don't normally include any costs on your balance sheet, but you might want to include them on your income statement.

I don't think so: they say explicitly that they hired to "match and fuel [...] growth".

While not 90%, transmission and distribution are around 40% of the cost of retail electricity, so lowering those substantially would go a long way.

I guess it depends on the country? In Germany (and a couple of other countries that I know of), the owners of a company are public.

You can surely see how this could be problematic? Q1: Should we lower taxes? Q2: Should we introduce 5k/month UBI?

If they did what you suggest, wouldn't you also conclude that they are doing it for the sake of (future) profit?

Name one thing that you, as a consumer, have not been able to get a consequence of the Seuz being blocked?

So do it? I really don't see the problem. I get that Deliveroo puts you on their platform even if you don't agree (the apps where I live don't do this), but if that's the case the restaurant is still getting the full price for selling their food. The customer pays the extra 20%.

No it doesn't make them fascist, and that's not what Eco is saying. Combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge is syncretism, which is a symptom of Ur Fascism (as discussed) above. Symptom does not equal implication.

I am not sure I understand your use of the word "symptom". Being syncretistic, by itself, is clearly not indicative of fascism (as you point out all religion is syncretistic to some extent, so is art, etc.), but if you see many of the symptoms that Eco describes - not just syncretism, but also traditionalism, irrationalism, uniformity of thought, fear of difference, populism, nationalism, etc. - then syncretism becomes part of your "fascism" diagnosis. By themselves these things can be part of various strands of political thought, only together are they Ur-Fascism.

Just like a headache, by itself is not indicative of a disease, but can be a clue in combination with other symptoms.

I returned to this essay when I saw the photo of the Jake Angeli in the Capitol - a Q-supporter wearing an Indian buffalo mask and a tattoo of Odin, storming the capitol alongside evangelical Christians. Relevant quote:

This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, “the combination of different forms of belief or practice”; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

[...]

If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled as New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge—that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

I used Miranda - seems likes its getting developed

Austria has FM4, which is an amazing radio station and well worth license fee. ORF Sport is also pretty good.

That's fine - that's awareness marketing and if you want to do it with online ads that's up to you. But then you should consider it compared to your other awareness marketing channel.

But the promise of performance marketing is exactly this immediate connection between ad spend and performance (i.e. sales).

The Nazis also built highways.

What about the morality of the situation? From a purely self-interested perspective I think its pretty obvious there is limited benefit given the risk. But if you are relatively young and healthy, expecting others to get the vaccine so you can benefit seems immoral.

It was an op-ed, not a story by the NYT.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand the role and requirements of serious journalism. One is attempting to corroborate information, and weighing that information by the likelihood that it is, in fact, fact. Tony may have seemed very credible to you, but I think that there are many people who are good at seeming credible while lying. So unless the specific information you find damning is corroborated by some source independent of Bobulinski, serious journalists will not and should not present it as fact.

Tucker Carlson is not serious journalism - he's opinion at best and propaganda at worst. None of the above applies to him (as persuasively argued by Fox News itself).

Let me quote the WSJ linked above: >The venture—set up in 2017 after Mr. Biden left the vice presidency and before his presidential campaign—never received proposed funds from the Chinese company or completed any deals, according to people familiar with the matter. Corporate records reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show no role for Joe Biden.

Here's a detailed Q&A by NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/25/us/politics/bidens-china....

Can you be a bit more specific on what you believe to be so important/surprising/relevant about this story that would make an entire journalistic career? What is the story that is not being told, and actively being suppressed? I have been following this quite closely and can't see it.

Have you ever seen a bus or garbage truck accelerate 0-60 in 3 seconds?

Even if this data was correct, the difference is that in 2020 there were pretty stringent measures in place to reduce the spread of Covid (which were not in place in the past for major influenza outbreaks). We do not have a clean counterfactual to what the number of deaths would be in the absence of those measures, but the height of the outbreak in Italy can perhaps serve as some approximation, and there the excess mortality was orders of magnitude above previous years.

"What the writers had in mind" is one way of interpreting laws in the present day, but by no means the only way. You will probably find a ton of laws in effect today that are applied to things, or interpreted in ways, that no one could have anticipated when they were written.

I think the key here is that it is bad according to society's legal norms, rather than any "socio-political norms". I think it is absolutely justifiable that Google filters based on legal norms, given that it is a company operating under a given legal system (or multiple). If the result was purely "technical" it would need to show a lot of content that you don't want it to show.

Do you have any examples of socio-political bias relevant to the discussion at hand?

Just yesterday the EU announced a massive stimulus, to be repaid over 30 years, perhaps partially by EU-wide taxes. What makes you way they are heading away from more integration?

The US typically sends Type 2 ambassadors to plush, comfortable countries, and Type 1 ambassadors to postings in difficult or very poor countries. I knew my small Eastern European country had made it when we started getting incompetent ambassadors.

I think the model is rather: a) buy long-term leases at low price b) sell short-term leases at high price

The problem with this model is that when demand for real estate falls (e.g. because of economic cycles, trends/tastes, etc.) the revenues will evaporate and the costs will remain.

Of course McKinsey has this structure. Indeed Puerto Rico recently investigated this structure and found it up to the task: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/about%20us/media%2...