handmodel

no

I wonder if the card companies themselves would be happy with those rules. I don't think it's a grand conspiracy. I think they are just looking at the business and realizing that the amount of money to be made from it (especially with chargebacks) is very small compared to the potential lawsuits/headlines of facilitating child pornography and as a result have been conservative.

If they were forced to allow it then it would give them cover and also their competitors would be as well - so there'd be no competitive disadvantage.

It's also very weird that the same type of people who normally talk about corporations/governments covering up pollutants do not talk about how many people could die from a potential lab leak.

This article seems like a real stretch. For their first example picked the absolute lightest ICE car (3000 pounds) and the heaviest electric car (an electric hummer). The Ford F-150 electric looks only about 33% heavier than the ICE version, and comparison like that seem more sense.

Even then the article finds in these (stretched) cases you need to drive around 50,000 miles for it to break even. But even that - it doesn't seem like too much to me? Trucks usually are bought on the assumption they will be driven to very high mile counts.

Gas prices have fluctuated wildly since 2020. This has had nothing to do with the number of people who own ICE vehicles.

Even if you assumed it was tightly correlated, then the second prices dropped you'd expect more people to buy. I'm also not sure what gas prices would be if suddenly everyone had an EV. Seems like they might be forced to charge more since the gas stations themselves would be making less on it?

In ten years I imagine a large majority of vehicles will still use gas. Last year EV sales were only about 7% of all cars. Cars have a relatively long shelf life and all projections I've seen (which admittedly are just speculations) have EV's passing ICE cars in about 15 years. But even then it's still half gas cars.

If I had to buy a new car today I'd still probably buy an ICE based on my needs/budget but I wouldn't do so because I think gas or car prices will crash or anything.

I disagree. By this standard the government should not even be building highways (they are subsidies to the technology of the automobile, after all)

The government built/supported plenty of the infrastructure that helped the internet/wireless communication take off fast. It obviously would have occurred without it but would have been slower.

I relate to that. I have some personal side projects that I enjoy though I worry they may not be sustainable if I start to have a family. Before this job I very much had a job I had complete ownership over and really loved it - even though it was not very well paying.

I have been building a lot of cool stuff the last couple years in the hardware space. I think in my mind I thought I'd been able to spin it off as a side project? But so far its the type of things I post online and amateurs find it very interesting/artistic but hard to monetize/make sustainable.

Ultimately that's close to what I'm doing! Not jumping ship until something finds my way that is definitely better.

I think I "want to be fired" because it would take some of the stress of the decision away from me. My girlfriend makes slightly more than me now - even though years ago I made about twice as her - and I admit I feel some pressure to keep up.

I probably should. I think it has been hard for me to find one that is part-time and worthwhile.

I taught myself circuit design/CAD/3d modeling over the last couple years since I've been doing some amateur product design. I feel like I've made progress but also this has consumed a lot of my spare intellectual time and although I had a few people reach out to me after seeing my amateur projects online have not made any formal progress into the business.

That is sorta how I hope it gets resolved. I do think I'm a quick learner, still. My job sounds extremely impressive on paper though when it comes to nuts and bolts I feel like I have atrophied for several years.

I do feel like my skills have atrophied. I've def taught myself some skillsets over the years - I love to learn - but mostly things that seem fun/interesting/challenging and not things that would transfer into a similar paying job.

Thank you. This is why I have not quit but why I responded to this thread of being "fired". I feel like it would make the decision for me and be a relief and work out in the long term. Just no time in the short term has it appealed enough to me to pull the trigger.

I do the occasional job searching - but not a ton. And my network feels smaller than it was when I started the job.

I more or less have a no show job. I am a programmer but for a private company whose business is entertainment. About 5 years ago I came up with something that traceably earned the owner millions. The owner/CEO loves me but I report directly to him with no other co-workers so a bit hard to "move up" I get paid 150k a year to work maybe 40 (flexible) hours a month? For the last two years I've pursued side projects (more artistic than business) but haven't reached the brake even point.

I've thought about leaving many times but it always feels like best case scenario I'd maybe get a 10%ish salary bump but one that is way more demanding. I know deep down this is bad for the long term but also hard to give up such a nice lifestyle especially when I've been able to fill it with other pursuits that were fulfilling.

This is why it's done but still sorta of strange to me that this was the way I was taught by camp instructors - even though we never were going for speed. Feels a bit like learning how to ride a bike with one of those aerodynamic helmets even if you aren't really ready to learn racing technique yet.

https://www.sportsperformancebulletin.com/wp-content/uploads...

For this particular example (housing) I agree that median isn't that informative. It doesn't cover the range of prices available and a theoretical city with a high median, but a glut of housing available cheaply, would look expensive according to this stat.

However, this is not my impression of housing in NYC at all. In fact - quite the opposite. The very low vacancy rate means that the floor is very high. That is why you see stories about essentially closets going for more than luxury apartments in other cities.

That sounds extremely slow but presumably now that they've built one the cost to build 100 or 1000 would be achievable if someone (or some government) had the interest.

I would think they would need a version that doesn't need the ship nearby to scale - but would still guess this is something that will be accomplished on the order of 30 years from now.

I'm not going to pretend to be an expert but it seems like the hard/expensive part is probably building the underwater drone capable of taking the LIDAR?

I would imagine at some point getting overhead satellite imagery by plane of the entire world seemed impossible - as did street view coverage of the entire US - but not the craziest expense once you have the ability to do it once.

I first started using Reddit around 2009 when I was in college and use it more today.

I browse old.reddit.com because I think that text feel is better.

I think it probably depends on your subreddit or area of interest? For my making hobbies I find it to be the best forum out there. Extremely good for my sports and television discussion as well.

The student who enters the classroom has an IQ that follows the same distribution of intelligence of any of the other students. Therefore, one student out of the 145 must have the highest intelligence and the chances that it is student #4, #30, #100, or #145 is the same.

Here is some python code you can run. You can change around the distribution however you want and you'd get the same exact results. The chance that a particular record is the highest in a set of IID variables is not dependent on the distribution itself.

  from numpy import random
  RecordsSet=0
  TotalSimulations=365000
  for i in range(0,TotalSimulations):
      ClassRoomSample = random.normal(100, 15, 144)
      RecordIQ = max(ClassRoomSample)
      NewStudentIQ = random.normal(100, 15, 1)
      if NewStudentIQ>RecordIQ:
          RecordsSet=RecordsSet+1

  print(100*float(1)/145)
  print(100*float(RecordsSet)/TotalSimulations)

Perhaps you are misunderstanding the records it is describing.

A record in that data is defined as a particular high in a particular city on a particular day. The data goes back 145 years in Los Angeles.

So if it is the hottest May 24th ever that would be a record.

If everyday followed an identical and uncorrelated distribution then we would expect that 1/145 days would be record.

In your IQ example imagine if you had a school with 365 separate classrooms with 144 students in each one. A new 145th student then enters each classroom. The chance that the new student is the one with the highest IQ is 1/145. So in the universe of the 365 classrooms you'd expect 2 new IQ records to be set.

The planet clearly is warming but I also agree this method is useless by itself.

For Los Angeles (my city) the data goes back 145 days a year. If temperature has not been increasing (and therefore each individual day follows an identical distribution) that would still mean that 1/145 days we'd see a record high in Los Angeles - so about two highs a year. Highs in Los Angeles are obviously going to be correlated to highs in San Diego - but not exactly because of cloud cover and stuff so its reasonable to think that even if we were in a boring unchanging climate we'd still see hundreds if not thousands of records set every day across the country.

I do hope this turns out to be workable and scalable fast.

Thinking of RVs reminds me of the cruise ship I was just on. I actually liked the cruise much more than I had guessed but even the premium service was terrible. I would think the cruise ship would be happy to shell out for better internet - could actually see remote working from a cruise if so.

fwiw I do not really see how problem solving intelligence correlates to consciousness. I think it is a bit of a stretch to think we only evolved consciousness to guess how other people will react. I don't think our theory of evolution or theory of neuroscience points to that strongly at all.

I think children are conscious, mentally slow people are conscious, and I am conscious when inebriated even though a large group of people in any of those categories would never be able to solve large engineering problems.

I used to have a viewpoint more similar to yours but after spending more time around animals (at least birds and mammals) they honestly seem to have most of the same instincts as humans.

Agree. Especially if you change the wording a bit.

I do think something like Brexit is fine for a referendum. It's a singular issue and clearly very important. In California we have referendums for weird tax issues that become impossible to be informed on and it leads to bad outcomes.

California essentially has a referendum system. But it's very confusing. Every ballot has like ~20 of them so as an informed person I have views on many of them. But then there are ones like "Should we fund this stem cell research project for 4B that looks into this" and people have no idea how to vote. Things sound good and then you realize it was funded by very specific group of people and the money would go to their own project. Even though we shit on legislators having super well-informed people with staffs actually does lead them to work out kinks and negotiate good policy that pleases a larger swath of people.

Right. I could totally see that. But the end result seems the same. They either hope it grows and therefore whatever losses they have are small compared to total amount of people who would ever withdraw. Or double down again and risk losing even more.

Can someone with more knowledge of finances and crypto explain this to me?

From the outside Tether always seemed like a scam. The characters involved scream scam and a stablecoin seems very easy to siphon off money from. So long as you assume that the number of Tether dollars held never drops by 80% then you can just pocket the 20% (of the giant number) and pay off withdrawals with new inflows. Due to the lack of regulation this seems like it would be easy to pull off - at least for awhile.

Is there reason to believe this isn't what's happening?

How much money are we even talking? If it's less than 10k (or its more than but she's still contributing to a normal retirement fund) then I wouldn't do more than lightly bring it up.

I am not long bitcoin or etherium but I definitely wouldn't call them scams at this point.

I'm also not sure why you think you are the only one with expertise on this. I am a programmer - so what if you are? You don't need to know how to code a blockchain to make a judgement on its future value anymore than you need to be a geologist to know the future value of gold.

I think you could casually send her some articles on the Luna collapse - or the 100 of recent articles on the collapse. But unless she is investing the majority of her wealth I would probably stay out of it? It isn't your money. It's possible to have opinions on bitcoin without being a programmer. And plenty of people with actual careers in technology have different opinions from you. And people in finance may have different opinions altogether and may even be more qualified.

If you had a relative in real estate would you not buy a certain house even if you felt like you did your due diligence and you really liked it? What if you had a friend in cars who had a strong opinion on Tesla?

I don't own any crypto - but also don't give my family too much financial advice unless they ask.