Pretty sure he was already warm because invading Poland was so not cool.

It seems like the Catholics are always confused at what kind of praying they should be doing…

Wait till you hear that he stole the prison bus on his way there

Good thing I finally finished voice training and no longer need Helium to pass 👍

People can call them whatever they want. You can call them homeless, unhoused, unsheltered, houseless, displaced, vagrant, destitute, loiterers, whatever language helps you talk about homelessness in a way that actually helps people and doesn’t obfuscate the issue.

I agree. But that’s a subjective stance obviously. I think since Minecraft was priced appropriately for its current value, there was no need to consider future value increasing. And on that basis they could have sold the game for more and chose not to. Still the point is that even if most people didn’t consider it, it incentivizes early purchases. If it were priced at the 1.0 build price at alpha launch, only die hard supporters would have bought it. Everyone else would wait. Same thing here.

You’ve just showed me why my point works. If you buy in now, your early purchase of Minecraft becomes more valuable over time as stuff is added. Therefore, buying now is better than buying later.

Whereas with his app, it’s overpriced now and will add features until that value proposition is met for more people. That discourages you from buying it and there’s no reason to buy it. Especially since it’s a subscription.

Now could he have done the Minecraft model? Yes. And since it’s a subscription, the price can go up slowly with no benefit to early adopters. I think the main reason he didn’t do that is because changing pricing this way generally doesn’t go well.

I don’t think that’s what he’s saying. You have to ask yourself a question: is offering an expensive upfront subscription for an evolving product an endorsement of assessing future value into your purchase. In my view, it isn’t and it’s not what he’s saying.

What he is saying is that to the minority who will find this a good value or who are okay donating to help them implement new features, go ahead and hit that button. Then separately he’s saying “the price will make more sense to more people as features are added” which is true but is not an endorsement of paying the current price for those promised features. At least from what’s in the article and what I’ve seen.

It’s the difference between saying that you should buy Minecraft because it will become an awesome game one day versus saying you should buy Minecraft because it’s either worth it to you now or you’re okay with helping to fund the development of future features you’ll receive. Those are very different.

Well color me convinced, that’s all pretty good info that I had no clue about. Forgive my skepticism, I’ve just never run into adhesive applications like that. Seems like they’ve come a long way, but due to economic pressures I’m guessing that myself and others have only ever had experiences with adhesives that are sub par. Even here I’m still curious about the properties of what Tesla is using. Especially since I’ve seen those panels be removed without heating or damage and just by pulling them off. Then again, ultimate strength of these adhesives doesn’t need to be insanely high, they just need to be durable probably. Thanks for the insight!

Edit: I went to go look this up and they are indeed using a 3M product along with a BETAMATE DuPont product, all of which seem up to snuff and are industry standard. I think now I know the adhesives are the least of the concerns with the truck, which is interesting.

I find your post very cool but I still have skepticism about the application of adhesives here, specifically because they seem to be used on this truck in many places where they don’t need to be. Why use an adhesive over a fastener? In my mind, you generally wouldn’t.

Also I think signage is a decent comparison to an automotive application but it isn’t a perfect one. You’re basically comparing a mostly static load scenario to a completely dynamic one. It’d be more akin to the aerospace example but even those adhesives are in a very different use case. These cybertruck adhesives have to last 7+ years of thermal cycling and dynamic loading. If these adhesives hold up over time, I’ll be very impressed.

Packaging is more effective to ban but also a lot more nuanced. Plastic packaging was developed over a lot of years and the products are designed for it so it would need to be a much longer term project.

Well now I’m hoping that the Switch 2 has a working emulator within a handful of months after release.

Also depends on where you’re measuring. They make up a ton of the plastics in stormwater runoff for example. Sometimes up to 95% from what I found. And that stormwater often ends up in our drinking water.

This isn’t what she’s trying to do. Instead of trying to blend in with moderates, she represents a radical and extremist part of the party that she wants to paint as the true moderates in order to leverage the opinion of the republicans upon Trump’s reelection.

The stance of tearing down speakers of the house is not new, she has railed against every speaker of the house this term for not enacting her extremist policies. What she is doing is trying to force the republican party’s hand to become more extremist because they can’t get over the line to win anything as a party without the extremists supporting them.

I fear that many people don’t understand this move from her but it’s clear if you’ve been paying attention. The point is to sell out the rest of the party that does not side with her. Her philosophy is “MAGA party or no party” and she has a small group of 5-10 allies that also believe this. If Trump loses, the party splits along these lines. If he wins, this fascist group will suddenly represent the whole party. That’s the bet she’s making.

Not even just conductors, these trains need staff period. One of the things about crime in general is that people are less likely to do it if they feel like the area presents itself as safe. Even things down to cleanliness, lighting, staff presence, and noise level will affect crime.

It seems like the city just doesn’t care at all about their transit because it’s extremely dirty, staff are basically nonexistent, the stations are loud and have no boundaries, and every part of them seems to be decaying infrastructure. Japan knows this well, your passengers will reflect the expectations you put upon them by their environment and staff.

I don’t have much to add because I agree with you on almost all of this. If the summation is pretty much that the Democratic Party is more unified in a post-trump era and that a third party would only serve to hurt them less because of that reason, then I agree with that. Whereas if republicans win this election, the US has a very dark future that may unite extremists and the death of the party would be less of a mess and more of an uphill battle for the entire country. At that point a third party would almost be irrelevant under the threat of a fall of democracy.

However, the only parts I disagree with are the parts where you talk about how the left is more cohesive. I think the problem that I’ve long noted with the left is that they all have very different political bends which does cause infighting and I think you’re underestimated the infighting that’s present. I don’t think the republicans have anything quite as serious as the liberal vs leftist split that the dems have. They have extremists but I’d point out that the extreme right is just an extension or an exaggeration of most of their views.

For instance, most republicans support anti-immigration policy and a lot of them do it due to some variety of racism or xenophobia. So when an extremist comes along and says some racist things explicitly, they’ll have everyone else on board for 90% of the conversation despite the different intentions.

Whereas with the left, liberals and leftists have very different ideals. And while it’s usually fine to combat the anti-republican ideals together, aside from that we are very split. You see this when Kamala is supporting fracking live on stage despite the ecological impacts that most of her party claims to be worried about. More moderate people will be convinced by this, which is why she said it. But the divide between a moderate democrat and a serious liberal or leftist on that issue would be night and day and you won’t have much middle ground there. Just something to think about.

First thing, I think that the Republican Party is highly likely to face a crisis of identity after Trump so you’re correct there. A moderate cannot appeal to their voter base anymore so their only choice now is to find another populist and those aren’t super common. But also people are mostly ignoring that Trumps existence has raised the voter participation numbers. I think after his disappearance, republicans will face far less participation and excitement.

I only get to talk about these things rarely but it’s interesting to think about. See once the Republican Party realizes it can’t win with votes and it can’t just cheat its way upwards, we get interesting results. That’s when they must pivot on things that appeal to moderates. They’d have to drop their anti-LGBTQ stances. I can’t see a world currently where they aren’t forced to give up on abortion. Basically most of their social issues would have to go. The party would look very different.

But then that all will piss off their extremists and they can’t do that. So this is what I think splits the party.

We talk optics though and I’ve always criticized the left on its optics. They aren’t good. And that outward representation reflects inwards. Let me tell you right now that being in the middle of discourse, the right doesn’t argue with itself often. The left does.

My main example is this genocide situation with Biden and Gaza. Plenty of leftists and democrats are still prepared to waste their votes because of that situation despite the harm reduction argument. The right won’t do this.

It’s weird to say that the left is more cohesive as a base when the current MAGA people are basically in a cult and I don’t know what’s more cohesive than a cult. That’s at least half of their current party voters. So aside from them splitting, they value loyalty and nationalism, both of which create an alliance within them. They also aren’t sophisticated voters so they’re unlikely to break rank because they aren’t really thinking much about positions.

I agree that the right is on more shaky footing than people think but it’s due to their current position I assume. For instance, consider if they had a young populist in their ranks. Think about if Trump was 45. We’d all be scared and rightly so because that cultist behavior would prevail and unite the party.

Mark my words, the only thing saving the party from not splitting is a new populist and that would be very bad for everyone if they found one.

As much as I think that the right is going to split after trumps loss, I think they’re also more cohesive than the left is by far. There are many flavors of leftists and while I think that there are also many flavors of right wingers, they have a much easier time banding around their goals because to be honest they don’t do much. They’re a regressive party. Regression is inherently more unifying than progress because we all disagree on how to achieve progress but regress is pretty simple.

Basically my theory is that the right would lose less from a split than the left because half of the left is ready to jump ship at any moment, as is the right, but the right is more cohesive due to shared identity and regression.

It wouldn’t screw them over until a legitimate third party is in place. And then maybe. But you have to ask yourself what a third party looks like if it looks like an alternative to both parties. Surely the first third party would just be a split between the parties, it would still take them awhile to win anything at all. But I could see alternatives being a more eco focused party and I honestly think it would screw both major parties. Which is the ideal case. If anything, this screws the dems more because of their voters are more likely to break rank with how the party is going.

This would be a good time for Kamala to keep asking for a debate and challenging him. Maybe even agree to do it on Fox to show how weak he is. Even if he accepted, I don’t think Fox would save him from another bad performance. We’ll see how polling works out I guess.