I would put money down that 50% of discord users are not moving away from the platform and won't before the end of the year. And if I'm wrong I happily get to move to a new platform so it's a win win bet :v
I think it's interesting they limit the types of content they use to determine your age. I'd guess they don't impose those same limitations when it comes to other uses (including targeted ads)
> Bad news for wall Street though if they have to go bankrupt first?
Don't worry, the already stretched taxpayer will be on the hook for everything just like in 2008!
This time the relief mechanism is already baked into the system (capital does learn from its past mistakes, even if it may not be the lessons you'd hope for!)
By the time the bankruptcies come, they'll all be owned by index funds and main street. The price will crash at the break of the bankruptcy, and wall street will swoop in to buy up the "distressed assets" at bargain bin prices.
I gave up on my book because after a couple decades I didn't have a good answer. Sure I could brag about the one full-up where I got 57mpg, and I knew about the one where it was only 36 - who cares.
Back in the 1930s the book was probably useful because changes in mpg were a sign you needed to do a tuneup early. But back then everybody knew a tuneup was every few months and once in a while something went off in between. Cars are a lot more reliable.
That was the main one, and also in case you ever ended up with car trouble you had a record of every place you had filled up and every time you had the car serviced. It was also financial: you could tell how much you were spending on gas, whether gas prices were going up or down, which stations had the cheapest gas, etc.
Nowadays a lot of this is recoverable from your credit card statements (though again, I don't know anybody who actually does this), but in the 80s you would usually pay cash for gas.
A friend of mine in high school (2012) was required to add to the notebook his parents kept in the car whenever he got gas. I wonder if his parents still do that kind of record keeping now that the car tells you its MPG, gas price historical data is easily accessible, and card purchases are tagged as "Gas" automatically in the banks that I use.
I do actually audit each transaction in my card statements each month to look briefly at the categories of spending I use most. Gas is a category, but that number doesn't really change my behavior. It's just a data point.
I’ve been keeping a spreadsheet of all my fillups. Mostly because I was curious about my monthly spend on gas with it having gone up so much. But it’s been interesting to see the mpg over time.
1. To monitor gas mileage primarily. Any sudden decline in gasoline mileage can warn of impending engine component failure. [I haven't experienced it but I suppose it could also warn of a repair error, e.g., if you failed to put a new air filter cartridge in to replace the old one (a major oversight but nonetheless possible) then it is likely that your mileage would go up suddenly. One would have to question whether the better mileage was b/c, say, you just switched to Shell gasoline or instead did something wrong when you recently changed the air filter?!]
2. keeping receipts ensures that if there is a problem and your engine is damaged, then you can show where you bought the fuel, oil or component and get recompense. This is rare but does happen and it can be a costly repair. Examples are:
- bad gasoline - usually debris or water. Can stop fuel flow and cost you replacement of a gas filter at the least.
- incorrect oil change - you pay for an oil change but they don't put on a new oil filter or they add the wrong kind of oil or they add too little oil or they add too much oil. Don't discount the last one: too much oil can damage some engines seriously. I once had a dealer change my car's oil. Prior to service I explicitly warned the mechanic that the engine was a rare model and required less oil than most. Nonetheless he overfilled it. Luckily I spotted the difference immediately b/c the engine ran like shite right out of the garage. I made a freeway U-turn,drove back in, re-explained the car's needs and insisted they drain off the overfill and let me check it. The mechanic tried to cover his ass by treating it as another "crazy customer" but I just told his companions that
a) he'd fucked up and
b) I had specifically warned him about the problem earlier so
c) they'd better keep an eye on him - he wasn't as good as they were.
3. If you sell a car, buyers love getting the records proving that you bought good oil/gas, performed maintenance, etc. FWIW most buyers do not continue to maintain such records in my experience.
I don't maintain a log book and I know only one person who does. But I file receipts for gas, parts, fluids, filters and major maintenance for each vehicle.
It might appear that all this is good reason to buy an EV but you've got the same problems as do ICUs. Suppose you pull into a facility in Kansas for a recharge as a thunderstorm rolls in. While you're eating lunch the facility is struck by lightning and the transient currents fry one or more parts on you EV. The recharge station is unlikely to be willing to pay your repairs unless you have proof you were there during a malfunction.
I did this for a couple of years but after my mileage didn't budge regardless of summer/winter/car age/mechanical work I got bored and stopped recording :-)
These apologetic “no fan of musk”, “before Elon became crazy” are tiresome.
You got a Tesla, just own it.
We liked the guy when he started that electric car thing, now it’s different but he’s no mass murderer.
I'm not apologizing for having a Tesla, I just want it to be clear that I'm not an Elon fan boy. You don't have to go far on the internet to find people praising Tesla cars for things that are not really that impressive. When Cybercab launched there were people who were making memes that cybercab was the "cool" robotaxi because there weren't sensors everywhere like Waymo.
But it's also important to not let fanboyism cloud judgment. Tesla has great software.
What legal responsibility would they take on by not using it, in specific? I can only think of defamation or something but I doubt a question mark covers you for that.
"legal" in media companies. It's a loophole in law where if you phrase something as a question, you are not claiming as truth.
Say the media claims, "Your mom could be the murder suspect?" You are not technically saying yo mama is a murder suspect though it is implied so.
Media companies won't be prosecuted for any "wrong info" for such titles by law because it's a "question".
Same here for the blog post. It's framing as a question, not taking a responsibility that (though author implies so) he is claming MCP is a bad idea wihtout owning it.
> Tiger cats previously had been considered a single species, but genetic studies decades ago suggested the existence of multiple species.
So more like they identified that part of the known population was a different species just now. It'll take more effort tagging and identifying other tiger cats to see if they also belong to this particular one?
There are other four species of Leopardus in Bolivia if I'm not wrong, and some had several subspecies. Many tiny, highly arboreal and nocturnal so no easy at all to catch or study. This animal was raised as pet since cub so is much easier to take samples. It could be the one animal in their species, ever, as an hybrid abandoned by its mother. Many oaks and willows do that trick routinely.
That said in 2020 there was an article proposing to split Leopardus colocolo in other 3 to 5. This article worked on the proposal, validating four new species more with L. tilcayo that was closer to L. tigrinus. National Geographic (as in other cases) embellished the history a little. Five new species of cats were disclosed, and four were described previously inside a species complex.
Yeah, the quirk being that the known population is just this one in the sanctuary. They haven't identified where specifically he came from or where there might be others, so for now he's a one-of-one.
> It'll take more effort tagging and identifying other tiger cats to see if they also belong to this particular one?
This effort is actually already ongoing. This splashy headline that seems to have crushed it on publicity front is actually just a small piece of the research currently being done on oncillas (aka tiger cats). The word on the grapevine for the past year or so is that the oncillas are going to get divided up into between five and twelve new species.
This all seems like good and sensible restrictions. Cutting down on how long data can be stored helps with privacy in an cases, and making sure the data isn't being sold or shared with anyone but the state should at least cut off some misuse from private orgs.
The fact that it came down to a governor to set these standards means it's going to be subject to even more abuse.
It was up to Flock to figure these things out before they deployed it. Instead we've got fifty separate states coming up with guesses as to the needed level of control, and each of them surely forgetting something. That's what happens when you roll your own security.
We now will have 50 separate state police forces looking for ways around the restrictions. And they will find them, because they are far more flexible in finding holes than governments are at patching them.
If you’re making a constitutional argument here, regulation of interstate commerce is constitutional. If I’m hiring a network of people to follow you around and make notes about you, that’s clearly commercial, and it’s going to cross state lines. Especially if I am myself being hired to hire those people, by people in all states, targeting people in all states.
Regulation of speech is plainly unconstitutional. Regulation of commercial stalking may involve speech, but a balancing test would likely find that it’s primarily a question of commerce.
The scale argument is the justification for creating the law in the first place, not what makes it legal or illegal. Yes, most people do think that scale makes things worse due to the increased effects. Mass murder is worse than regular murder, mass dumping is worse than throwing a single battery into a lake, etc. That’s why laws often take scale into account or create different offenses specifically based on scale.
The patriot act comes to mind. There are millions of people in the US, and we all gave up some level of privacy in our affairs, so it's straightforward.
They say there is unlimited reconnaissance at the state level, but not once in my life did a wife or a friend or even an enemy of mine came up and said - I know you were at a bar last night. Shrug. What exactly was told to someone. What was found out?
Pandemic now, We lost our ability to go into a fucking restaurant for a time.
reply