I’m over 40 and this trash works on addicting someone like me just fine. Social media companies went full Icarus and I couldn’t be happier watching the wax run.
How do you invest in ad companies that ran ad campaigns for smoking companies.
It’s changing and the sentiment towards this crap is adjusting fast. Whoever is running the focus groups on the pushback campaigns aren’t finding good vehicles yet either.
Congress sets the budget not the president. The administrations budget is aspirational, and if they want to force it they are required to use political savvy and whatever influence they have built up. Yeah so zero influence as all of that is towards cover ups, stock manipulation, and incompetence.
The executive has the veto and a willingness to leave the government non-functional (funny how anti-government types are often okay with kneecapping government). They're not powerless.
Technically true, but the president also selects the administrator of NASA, and this presidency isn't terribly fussed about following laws about how allocated money can be used.
So don't be surprised if suddenly half the NASA budget is used to pay for a second ballroom or more missiles to CENTCOM.
Yes, but this President has decided that he can move money around or just not spend the money, regardless of the budget, and this Congress has let him.
Yes, as we know this Congress is famous for doing its own independent thinking and not rubber stamping everything that arrives with a little bit of mango colored makeup on it.
We had a working system. It was the current administration that slashed NASA's budget and castrated the JPL aerospace employment pipeline. NASA's talent shortage is a self-inflicted wound.
Panic-firing and panic-reemploying your workforce every <4 years is not a sustainable rate of attrition for professional, research-oriented culture.
It's funny to me how much this administration gets the blame for everything. NASA would had been widely regarded as schlerotic and archaic before these most recent budget cuts. Filled with beaurocrats who didn't even know what their job was. But, the budget gets cut under Trump and now the rot in the organization is forgotten.
I don't think they should have their budget cut but they weren't a great agency before and were still declining.
A program like this, targeting younger people for short stints sense like a great way to bring in some new blood and ideas. Hopefully they can do something innovative that gets people thinking that investing in NASA is worth it.
It's funny to me how quickly people leap in front of the train to pretend like this fixes everything. NASA still has an anemic culture, and opening the door to interns is not a replacement for their failing talent acquisition. Budget cuts, revoked contracts and fired personnel will not stimulate positive change either.
> they weren't a great agency before and were still declining.
"Were"? They are. You're again giving premature credit to a policy that hasn't worked yet and ostensibly throttled NASA's capabilities. This is this administration's problem as much as it was Biden's, Trump 1's, and Obama's. You don't have to come in here with a chip on your shoulder just because I'm blaming the current iteration of the disaster.
> "Were"? They are. You're again giving premature credit to a policy that hasn't worked yet and ostensibly throttled NASA's capabilities.
I didn't assert otherwise. In fact, I clearly stayed that I _hoped_ this move would help. The status quo certainly wasn't working and I could see a way for this move to be helpful.
I'm not saying it's a great idea and it'll for sure work but, I guess, fuck me for trying to be optimistic about a decision made by this administration...
This was my experience. Kept getting told just try the new version. When I would the issues I had weren’t fixed and I bounced off it again. For very long trips it’s nice, but so is lane assist.
It always had the feeling of being outside with your toddler by the pool. I can look away but I have 50/50 odds of a dead toddler if I do it for to long.
This is what the Tesla fans have been saying for years. "Oh, you're on the previous software version, bro. You gotta try the latest version, bro, trust me bro it's so much better. FSD on the current version is totally working for me, bro." "Oh, you're on today's software version? Don't worry, bro, the next one is going to be so much better, just wait for it bro, trust me bro we're going to have working FSD in the next version, bro."
There are too many things that can go wrong, you should never look away from the road for more than a second or two.
Adaptive cruise control, lane keeping, blind spot detection and emergency braking are all the modern automation I want in a personal vehicle at this point. Other drivers are unpredictable, I want to choose how I respond to their various forms of idiocy and not delegate to a black box.
And what percentage of a house's price is the building?
> ~50% of repair is labor.
And how much does the average home owner spend on repairs a month?
I've been in my current house for almost 3 years. I've had one significant repair that would have cost around 3k. I did it myself but that was the quote. Not too bad.
In places where people are concerned about a housing shortage, the majority of the cost is land.
> In places where people are concerned about a housing shortage, the majority of the cost is land.
This is true in constrained areas like SF bay area. Back when I was digging into real estate economics, I found data on this from HUD, they have a price indicator dataset. https://www.fhfa.gov/research/papers/wp1901
Also look at the Lincoln Institute, they have fantastic studies.
In places like San Francisco, 80% of the value is in the land. In other places, it's 15-35%. The historical national average is about 33% but now it's a bit higher.
Completely different economic rules dominate in constrained areas like San Francisco versus unconstrained areas like Phoenix. But most housing is in unconstrained areas, the constrained areas are expensive elite sections. In most of the country, house prices track construction costs, and the high land prices are effectively economic segregation that weed out antisocial people, causing these areas to be even more desirable and sought after, which raises the bar even higher. All "nice areas" are nice because of gatekeeping, and in the US this is usually high land prices. Traditionally, each city had its own immigration policy, and they would chase out of town people who weren't seen as productive or who were antisocial, and as a result, you would have poor people living on the outskirts of towns.
In places like SF, richer people move in, house prices go up but there is not much change in the population. In other places, more people move in and more housing is built.
A lot of the debate surrounding housing boils down to people imagining a world where SF housing rules applies and thinking this is appropriate national policy, or others looking at national datasets and thinking this would apply to places like SF. Much of housing and land economics seems counterintuitive, for example how cities get less dense over time, e.g. https://www.lincolninst.edu/publications/working-papers/pers...
But once you learn how to think about it, it all makes sense.
No, you make it a crime and prosecute it. What loony tunes world do you live in where you start giving away peoples other info. This just incentivizes you to abstract your data like businesses abstract their profits.
Make it a crime. Prosecute it. This isn’t hard, unless you have a legislature that is incapable of passing laws. People are becoming fed up with this stupidity. Give it a few years and a few congressman kids getting targeted as it becomes more mainstream and things suddenly change. We’re at the leading edge of the stupidity, voters, families, politicians aren’t angry enough yet. It will change, legislation is cyclical.
That's what will likely happen. And that's why girls will just accept it. Plenty of harassment is already illegal, and it's still a normal part of life for women and girls.
And I agree that giving up that personal information would be a nightmare. That's one reason it won't happen. It's just probably the only analogue to what the perpetrators do that would actually scare them.
We're likely just going to put up with this state of affairs.
I would expect China limiting the movement of their rural populations from moving into cities might be a big factor.
Also it seems to end in 2025 before Iran started killing protesters in mass. Glancing around the index in question is very focused on civil liberties vs financial and life attainment in others.
Iran was not a haven of freedom before 2025. Women could get stoned for not wearing a burqa or attending men’s volleyball matches. Scoring Iran higher than China at any point in the past couple decades is ridiculous.
How do you invest in ad companies that ran ad campaigns for smoking companies.
reply