Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)CA
Posts
2
Comments
339
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Yeah. Everybody pays for it, but the guilty cops pay as much as every other city resident despite being at fault.

    Malpractice for cops should be something anybody who touches or is affected by a city budget advocates for, as unplanned expenditures for several million may mean cutting essential programs and staff.

  • “Even under optimistic scenarios for the pace of physical reconstruction, the scale of destruction in Gaza has been such that, simply from the narrow perspective of moving in building materials, it would still take until 2040 and probably longer to restore the housing units destroyed since the start of the war,” the researchers concluded.

    Article explains the reasoning. They chose the metric of moving building materials into devastated areas

  • This shit can destroy companies and tank its value

    Leaving hundreds of contacts in limbo with no resolution has the potential to cost more than $17 million in legal fees and termination clauses.

    Where the fuck is the board of directors and why are none of the shareholders revolting?

  • Cameras are (generally) passive systems. They do not send out light and analyze the returns. They just absorb light and reconstruct a scene.

    Radar systems are active. They send out pulses or continuous waves of EM energy at different frequencies than light (much lower) and analyze the returns. They do not need existing light to do their jobs because they're sending out and receiving their own specific emissions. Because they run at lower frequencies than light, they are able to "see" through certain weather phenomena like fog and are relatively unfazed by darkness.

    That all being said, you can measure things passively and actively. Radar is pretty damn good at measuring distances, as that's the entire reason behind its invention. I'd say its much more reliable and accurate compared to optical systems.

  • It’s interesting to see these posts in contrast with posts showing that debt is soaring and that young people aren’t saving for retirement.

    If median millennial wealth has greatly improved, then it’s not necessarily a “rich vs average and poor” scenario, but more likely “rich and average vs poor.” Add to that surveys that most people aren’t saving and now the data doesn’t agree with what people are saying.

    https://lemmy.world/post/14819541

    https://lemmy.world/post/14826580

  • We have plenty of things to be old grumpy grouches about.

    “Those banks ruined the American dream and we bailed them out!”

    “Fossil fuel companies successfully lobbied the government to allow them to poison our planet in the name of profit!”

    “Those Disney crooks consolidated all media and destroyed independent creative ventures!”

    “Back in my day we could afford a house if we saved 10 years of earnings for a down payment and then took out a loan eventually totaling twice the value of the purchase price. You kids have it easy with your rental sleeping pods and low-monthly rate outdoors park subscriptions. You don’t even contribute to furniture or clothing industries because you don’t own a place to put any!”

  • The bottom 20% of earners aren't likely to make the same amount in CA vs TX.

    California's minimum wage is $16. Working 40 hours (hard on a minimum wage job for reasons) brings $640 a week. 10.5% of that is $67

    Texas's is $7.25. 40 hours of that job is $290. 13% of that is $38.

    In this bad example, a minimum wage earner in California pays almost double the tax than a minimum wage worker in Texas. It's a bad example for many reasons, including us not taking into account the extra spending power the California worker has after taxes.

  • I've lived in both. The average people don't seem to care.

    Older Texans might namedrop California at times when they're airing political grievances, but older people everywhere seem to have some casual "product of the times" prejudices against something.

  • I’m not an economist but that makes sense to me.

    What about a modified scenario:

    A small island has three cupcake makers operating out of their homes: Meta, Alphabet, and Bytedance. Each has captured a section of the island’s market with cupcakes and at this point, there’s no real opportunity for growth. Meta can’t convince Bytedance’s customers to switch because they prefer other flavors. Meta would need to purchase one of the other cupcake companies in order to expand.

    None of the cupcake makers are interested in selling their companies. They consider themselves elite and their successes feed into the CEO and shareholder perceptions of value and success.

    Now, we consider that one of the cupcake companies is funded by a rich uncle from a different country. The island’s elders decide that the uncle’s influence is too great and orders Bytedance to sell its cupcake company or leave the island.

    We’ve established earlier that people who like Bytedance cupcakes don’t necessarily want to eat Meta or Alphabet cupcakes, so if they leave the market, those customers may be gone for good. They may have a change of heart and decide that cupcakes of any flavor are fine, but they may also be angry that the government forced their favorite place out of business. In any case, Meta and Alphabet cannot rely capturing this segment of the market to grow.

    Faced with the dilemma of possibly gaining customers organically or definitely gaining customers by purchasing their preferred product brand, I’d argue that the remaining companies may jump on the opportunity to purchase Bytedance before they are forced out. None of the cupcake companies were up for sale in a traditional sense before, so this was never a realistic path to achieve growth.