What is completely wild to me is that there are only 4 main apps: Reddit, twitter, instagram, and Facebook. Almost every public conversation happens on one of those platforms. And of those four platforms, one of them was bought by one singular person. Some people just don’t get the absolute scale of how much one person can just buy of our communities.

Like it or not, there are businesses on Twitter. Celebrities are easy to reach and talk to. Even companies use Twitter for support. News outlets post there. It’s a whole community. Was it a bit toxic? Yeah. But it wouldn’t have mattered. One guy bought it.

Similar to what you said, if you were to run the numbers on this I’m pretty sure owning twitter to Elon is not much different than owning a cable subscription to your average family. A whole community of tens of millions of people bought by one person and its success doesn’t matter. Capitalism is broken. And if you think that’s bad, imagine how he can affect your government when a Supreme Court justice goes for a small small fraction of the price…

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.

Hello. (Am I doing this right?)

Ah that makes sense, it’s oddly suspicious they’d do this out of the blue. Though I am curious at the arbitration. Can they not include a clause that just says that the forced arbitration can be waived by them when they so choose? I feel like they would make carve outs for these big cases if they could to where they can still arbitrate on smaller cases which costs them less.

(Also updating my post text, thanks!)

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.

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.

He did say that he watched the news. If he didn’t prepared, how else would he have known about people eating cats? Checkmate liberals.

I believe that Vortex, the nexus mod manager, has Linux support now that I have heard is fairly straightforward but I haven’t tried it myself.

I will say though that I recently used Vortex for modding my Fallout 4 playthrough and it was a breeze on windows while using a Nexus mod collection. Takes a lot of the pain out of modding for sure. So if you can get their mod manager running I think it’s worth a try. Could be as simple as downloading Vortex, finding a collection of mods you like, downloading the collection (usually a temporary subscription is nice for this, and then running the game. You could be done like I was in a matter of a couple hours.

What the EU actually needs to do is to spearhead and help find everyone a way to actually “own” digital things. I think I’d be fine with not having a disk drive if I could buy my game, not be reliant on servers to download it in the future, trade my games with friends, and choose to sell it when I felt like it.

We need to find a way to get back (most of) the benefits of physical media without actually having to go back to it.

Agreed. Some level of xenophobia is expected though. That’s especially true if you were to think that the other tribes phenotypes are reminiscent of disease or sickness. I’m pretty sure that what you’re pointing out about wars starting with land isn’t so much because humans want to protect their land but because settling in one spot makes one more xenophobic by nature. Your breeding group is now smaller so phenotypes become distinct. Which means that encountering outsiders or wanderers would increase that xenophobic response. Prior to that you’d have a more or less homogenous group within anywhere you could reach which means that xenophobia makes far less sense as you cannot always identify “tribe”.

To sum up what I’m saying: over time as complexity began, cooperation between phenotypes lessened and competition between distinct phenotypes emerged. This could be what drives a lot of human xenophobic behavior, especially in the modern day. As we developed language this got even worse as xenophobia now includes a language barrier. Meaning that outsiders marked themselves as such even if they held the same phenotypes. This led to a lot of tribalism and history has not evolved from there.

(Just a layman but I did some reading and thinking)