underwater
Big cars, the slow incursion of American sports, more American brands popping up (including Starbucks actually getting a foothold), Gen-Z using American terms like math and trash, and a rise in the “screw you” style of American individualism.
I don’t think any of this is making Australia a better place to live.
You might also see battery prices push the price of new cars well below that of second hand ICE vehicles.
Even if the replacement window for existing vehicles doesn’t change, the environmental impact would run ahead of the adoption curve. High volume use cases like delivery and Ubers would be the first to switch to EVs.
But the most efficient gambling provider is the one that extracts the most money from its customers. Helping gambling companies be successful is a net loss to society.
If you invested a billion dollars at a conservative 5% interest rate, you could employ 200 people at 250k a year on the interest alone.
I couldn’t bring myself to pay the hefty monthly fee though, knowing my kid’s interest would wane and then her creation would be forever inaccessible unless I continued to pay.
One thing I would have gladly paid for is asset packs, being able to adapt some great sprites and background art would have been a killer feature.
CMS’s for news publishers have distinct fields for link title and thumbnail images (appearing on the linking page) and article title and hero images (appearing on the destination page).
This seems redundant until you consider that the context for linking pages and the article page are different. Having clean summaries for each page on Wikipedia seems like it would be useful in many places.
There is no expectation of “reasonable effort” to not selling alcohol to minors. It’s flat out illegal and heavily penalised. Nor is there a requirement for companies to find a way to sell alcohol to adults without asking for ID.
I get the concern you have, but you’re arguing against a scarecrow version of the legislation.
> A provider of an age-restricted social media platform must take reasonable steps to prevent age-restricted users having accounts with the age-restricted social media platform.
It doesn’t specifically require them to collect IDs. However it does say the opposite and that the site can only collect government ID or a digital ID information if:
> the provider provides alternative means [not involving IDs] for an individual to assure the provider that the individual is not an age-restricted user; and (b) those means are reasonable in the circumstances.
I’m not going to argue that the legislation is perfect. But it doesn’t actually do what most opponents are accusing it of doing.
Huge parts of America hate EVs. There is endless debate about nuclear vs clean energy vs coal, which prevents any change from happening.
After all, a culture on 1:1 communication has a lot of downsides. The same question gets asked repeatedly, replies don’t become searchable, the same people (usually the most experienced) end up being constantly tapped for answers
I'm left leaning, but I think jobs in rural areas, inflation, cost of living are all valid concerns that should be addressed regardless of who is in power. I disagree to varying extents with Trump's stance on abortion, immigration and gun control. But I also understand why people have a different opinion to me.
What I see online is a continuing anger towards the left and a determination to not only discredit their opinions, but also punish them for their dissenting views. There is this gleeful perception that it's time for payback.
But the reason a multinational like Microsoft might promote a growth mindset are different. Employees who are open minded are able to work with others and collaborate more effectively. Employees who actively seek new data and try to invalidate their preconceptions can be more successful in large sprawling organisations.
This statement is deliberately worded to avoid making a promise because Elon knows it is effectively a big fat lie. To date Tesla have solved the same problems that others have already solved. You can’t extrapolate progress because what comes next are the really hard problems that no one has solved. Even if Tesla is able solve those problems, there is zero chance that they can move at the same speed. They have 50% of an autonomous robot, but the next half is going to take 90% of the effort.
This is the usual smoke and mirrors. Elon shows off a tech demo using incremental gains and falsely represents how long it will take them to deliver on a revolutionary product.
Edit: it looks like the theme-color is meant to stay stuck as whatever the initial green/blue colour was. But for me, it shows as white if the initial choice is green.
Instead people are told there is a solution for recycling. They feel like the problem of plastic waste is solved. So they don’t make any efforts to reduce or reuse their waste.
The chart showing home ownership rate is broken down by "generation" but each cohort becomes skewed towards older members of that group as we move towards the present. If you look at boomers and millennials at age 25 that's a fair comparison. But if you compare boomers and millennials at age 40, you're now comparing all people born 1946 to 1964 (18 year range) against just the millennials born 1981 to 1984 (3 year range). This group of older millennials were in their late 20s when house prices tanked after the financial crisis and in their mid 30s by the time home prices started rising dramatically in 2020. This selection bias means if there is an overall downward trend in home ownership, the boomer line will stay fixed but the millennial line for ages 28 to 43 will move down next time the data is analyzed. This is almost certain to happen.
The second bit of fudging that's going on is that this chart is looking at home ownership. But a home is not a house. Millennials and Gen Z are more likely to buy an apartment than previous generations. It's not fair to say that a boomer buying a free standing house is equivalent to a millennial buying a two-bedroom apartment. The quality of life and the opportunity for capital gains are much lower.
Your point is valid for normal usage patterns where there is a direct relationship between active users and cost. But an attack meant OP’s costs were sky rocketing even though usage was flat.