Yeah, they are definitely safer and easier to ride. It's just what do you do when you get to the destination? For a one wheel or skateboard you can just bring it inside the store and carry it around, or stash it under the table at a restaurant or the seat on a bus/train. Sometimes I'll even hide it in some bushes at the park since it's so small and unnoticeable. For a scooter they usually won't let you bring it inside a store or onto a bus/train, and I don't trust locking it up outside since I'm in a city with a lot of bike theft. If that's less of a problem then a scooter might be the way to go.
The answer to this is also the answer to where they were created, San Francisco. They're perfect there because:
Cars are a hassle to deal with for traffic and parking. It's dense enough and public transit is good enough that you only really need to walk/ride the last half mile.
The hills are no joke, I'm pretty in shape and even I have to walk a bike up most of the hills. This can be helped by an electric bike but that brings us to
Bikes get stolen fairly often. Especially if you have an ebike this will cost a lot in the long run. With a one wheel you can just carry it in the storeand not have to worry.
For most other American cities that are less dense, more flat and have less thefts they start to make less sense.
They didn't have the ability for haptic feedback at the beginning, they had to create it. There's no haptic motor in the board, they have to use the main motor to make vibrations without effecting the ride or balance. Should they have looked into it at the beginning, yes, is it as irresponsible as not turning on a system that already exists, no.
Depends, as a toy, yes, as a means of transportation, not really. I live in a dense city so it's my main means of transport, cheaper than a car, and even bikes once you consider how often they get stolen, at least in my city. With a one wheel you can just carry it inside and not have to worry about some guy taking it.
Not worth my life though, hopefully this update fixes things.
Would you rather that source be providing clean drugs and the money going towards drug education and addiction prevention programs, or filled with God knows what and the money going towards guns for a gang or cartel.
The demand is and will always be there. Better the supply come from an organ we can regulate then a crime syndicate.
Anecdotally speaking as someone close to the one they're closing in SF the store really didn't make sense. It was too small to offer the variety of goods you want from target. For the stuff they did have they couldn't compete with other stores in the area. For groceries there's a Costco, trader Joe's and local coop close by that have more variety, and for electronics there's a Best buy across the street. Combine all that with competition with Amazon for misc. Home goods and they have no market.
Guess it's easier to blame theft then a failed business model, especially to shareholders.
Why, they're children, they have nothing to do with this war and can't do anything about it. Its not even like they'll bring enough money back to significantly effect the war economy.
Fuck Putin and his imperialism but this whole collective punishment for a population living under an authoritarian regime seems unfair and petty . Yeah a majority of them support the war but banning their kids from football isn't gonna help that, and even if it did they aren't going to overthrow the government for it.
On your first point you should read the question of nationalities which Lenin wrote shortly before his death. He clearly wanted to take down the tsarist apparatus after all the existential threats to the Soviet Union were gone.
Where did Luxembourg say Lenin was trying to recreate the tsarist empire? She was critical of the Bolsheviks authoritarianism but If anything she was also critical of the Bolsheviks limited allowance for nationalism and would've suppressed nationalism further, she was a strict internationalist.
If they did dismantle the state apparatus before the Nazis came what do you think would happen? The Soviet Union was barely able to turn the tide of the war with a united front and 20 years of intense, brutal industrialization. If they had dismantled the state and Russia was just a bunch of rural locally run villages in a loose confederation in 1939 the Nazis would've steamrolled over them and genocided the population.
The individual right was decided by a 5-4 court decision along party lines 2 centuries after the fact. It's not as clear cut as freedom of speech
Poor people and people of color are disproportionately victims of gun violence. You may come back with "good guy with a gun" but in most altercations more guns equals more deaths.
While Reagan's gun law in California was racist, it wasn't what killed the Panthers, FBI assassinations did. Even if black people had all the guns in Texas they still wouldn't be able to challenge the state.
Equating soviet style communism and fascism completely ignores the base. Yes the structure of the government is similar but in fascism the underlying economic system is still capitalistic and market based, while in Soviet style communism it is nationalized and planned. It also ignores ideology, fascism is about asserting national and racial supremacy to the detriment of inferior races, communism is about seizing the means of production from the bourgeoisie and giving control to the proletariat. Even if the government structure is similar, the policies those governments enact are wildly different. Thats like saying reddit and lemmy are the same because they both work on up voted content percolating up.
Stalin believed in the values of communism, he just also believed everyone was out to get him. Economically he followed Lenin's plan of nationalization and collectivization even more zealously then Lenin would have. Lenin wasn't as paranoid as Stalin and probably wouldn't have killed and gulaged millions of "suspicious" people but he was still very much a dictator and was willing to use any means necessary to achieve his goals, same with Trotsky.
With any of them the super structure of the state and how it's organized may vary a bit, but it would have all been built off a nationalized and collectivized base. Whether you want to call that base communism is up to you, but you can't say one is and one isn't.
local communities managing themselves (something like city states maybe?) and their relations to other communities
Your describing a Soviet you filthy commie.
But for real what your describing is communism as marx originally thought of it. The one example marx gave as a model for what communism would be was the Paris commune which adheres to a lot of what you said. Most leftist agree that that's the end goal it's just a matter of how to get there. Lenin originally pitched the Soviet Union as just that, a bunch of local councils(soviets) freely cooperating and making there own rules. He saw how the Paris commune's openness and military indecisiveness led to it being brutally suppressed though and wanted an interim top down dictatorship and rapid brutal industrialization to handle this threat. The threat never went away though, first with the Nazis almost annihilating them then the u.s. pointing nukes at them, so neither did the dictatorship.
Their end goal was still avowedly the same though, and communism, to me at least, is about that goal. Their are a bunch of different theoretical paths to it, and there's tonnes of infighting as to which ones the best, but all communists agree that the commune/Soviet/city state should have all the power.
We need paid maternity and paternity leave. A lot of the cost in childcare is going to pay a bunch of people minimum wage to take care of newborns. It's not good for the new borns who still won't get enough attention, it's not good for the overworked caretakers, and it's not good for their parents where half their paycheck is going to child care. The only people benefiting are the employers who can get even more labor out of employees who should be home taking care of their baby.
Seems about right. They don't have a complete monopoly and the industry seems to be making most of their money off micro-transactions these days instead of sales, something valve takes no cut of outside there own games. Meanwhile apple and google do have monopolies and take a cut of micro-transactions which accounts for there significantly larger revenue.
Yeah, they are definitely safer and easier to ride. It's just what do you do when you get to the destination? For a one wheel or skateboard you can just bring it inside the store and carry it around, or stash it under the table at a restaurant or the seat on a bus/train. Sometimes I'll even hide it in some bushes at the park since it's so small and unnoticeable. For a scooter they usually won't let you bring it inside a store or onto a bus/train, and I don't trust locking it up outside since I'm in a city with a lot of bike theft. If that's less of a problem then a scooter might be the way to go.