In an ideal world, the penalties you describe are suitable. Though, gaming industry aside, for the executive level of most any corporation, being a scapegoat and handed a golden parachute is the worst case scenario for them leaving. In many cases floating across the street right into another executive position.
Jail time isn’t a likely outcome. It just isn’t the world we live in, unfortunately.
I was looking at the Volt a couple years ago but the only ones around were over 25k. Then I started looking for a BMW i3, but, like so many of the cheaper EVs, there’s not many for sale. It’s a shame these smaller vehicles, even a hybrid, aren’t pumped out the factories left, right, and centre.
It’d be so much safer - and quieter - in the city if smaller cars were more pervasive.
It’s almost like they knew in the sixties that they were in for some problems and have since been devising ever more complicated methods of disinforming the public in order to maintain their wealth. Does my head in sometimes.
Without knowing any examples of the vehicles that are for sale everywhere except, roughly, half the world, I can’t really say much them. What I can say is that compared to the monstrous subsidies the oil and gas industry recieve, it does seem like those tariffs could be done away with. At least on the face of it, perhaps the issue is more intricate than that but I’m sure you grasp my meaning.
I see what you’re getting at but this would be difficult for a publisher to stick with in the event the game does horribly. Requiring them to keep their word to the date advertised would end up with them only guaranteeing a week, or send ramifications through all industries requiring truth in advertising.
A middle ground would be simply to legislate that when games require online connectivity for any reason, the appropriate software is released to allow a locally run server to enable online function at the time the company decides to decommission their servers. Then require them to hold these files in an accessible manner for at least as long as the servers had been active for.
That would be difficult in the event the company goes out of business, but I’m sure this would be a difficult thing to explain to most politicians so maybe not so simple after all.
When 52% of all trips made are less than 3 miles and less than 2% are over fifty miles, I don’t think battery swapping is something any individual needs on a regular basis.
I could get on board if manufacturers were making $10,000 sub 50 mile vehicles that were compatible with a swap station so you could switch to a larger battery for the weekend. This would have to be a standard adopted by all however, and even before that, they’d have to make small cars. Which they won’t, because we all know they are too busy making trucks and SUVs.
Not sure if this image from the DOT is actually of this specific shipment because I found this image from April when they moved the eighth part and it’s less that half the weight. Here’s a two minute video of it.
Do you live in a city or an are with a lower population? I strap the helmet on in the city or doing some speed, but when we’re out visiting with family in the country or a small town, we usually go without it.
I’ve been using Shokz for a decade now. They’ve replaced a couple sets at no cost. I wear mine every day. Even for the occasional swim.
Listening to podcasts definitely gives longer battery life than listening to music. Though even the odd time I’ve drained the battery in a day, I charge it with a battery pack for fifteen minutes and it’s charged again.
Not many products I’d say are worth every cent, but from the quality to the customer service, Shokz are great.
Seems like you’re describing renting in an apartment complex or similar. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison to owning a single family home.
Not that you’ve raised bad points. Renting does have the benefits you’ve described, though lawn care in my experience is hit and miss. The issue is getting these benefits must cost something. So long as having them doesn’t mean the rent is double the mortgage, then it’s worthwhile.
Otherwise, renting is just another more expensive option for all the people that can’t afford the upfront cost of getting into the housing market.
I see what you mean. People use their devices at different levels. That may not be the best way to put it.
My meaning is that a portion of the users will be the type to spend a couple hours digging through each setting on a new device to set it to their needs. Another group will use the device with minimal initial adjustments, and tweak things as they find things they don’t like. Then there’s a third group that will almost never open a preferences panel and just use a device by its factory settings, likely to never consider potential improvements to their user experience.
From what you’ve said, I imagine your in that second group. I myself am in the first one I described; I look at the options of any hardware I purchase or software I download before I actually begin to use it.
Unfortunately - in the context of this post - the number of people in that third group I imagine outnumber us by multiple orders of magnitude, and therefore companies with shareholders to appease will always manufacture devices with as much bloat and advertising and invasive data mining as they can be paid to put in.
I think that last bit is more of a ‘what you make of it’ situation, regardless of how smart or dumb a phone is.
Unfortunately the manufacturers want the data and advertising revenue, and they’d only be persuaded to offer an alternative if they made the same amount of money.
If each sale of a $900 smart phone gives them $100 of ad revenue over a couple years, I’d bet my bottom dollar they would charge $200 for the ‘dumb’ version.
Unfortunately, like most issues we face, this is not a stand alone problem. I’ll concede, over the length of ownership of the car, a brand new electric vehicle is more environmentally friendly than keeping your current combustion engine vehicle.
However, we don’t live in a society where the majority can make that choice independent of other factors. EVs are more expensive across the board.
Even if the purchasing cost of an off-the-lot EV were equivalent to continued use of an older ICE across two years - most people can not afford it.
A big difference I find is having the separations be padding and not a line. Even if each option took up the same number of pixels, the line makes it too visually crowded.
I’ll give Voyager a go and see how it is.
Might be a hold over from Reddit is Fun but I can’t say I’m keen on the way the voting is displayed there. Seems to take up too much real estate maybe?
Either way, I’m not a fan of colouring certain text or the lines dividing each post. Both these things make is too busy for my taste.
Then again, maybe I’m just bland.
Here’s what posts look like in my compact configuration of Jerboa:
I see buses as a good method of figuring out routes when first implementing a transit system similar to how some developments leave out walking paths to see where people typically walk and install them afterwards.
Generally though, trams can allow for more passengers transported per trip and per operator than a bus. Good for high and low traffic areas with dedicated transit lanes.
Don’t get me wrong - trams certainly don’t replace buses. Multiple forms of transit are best practice of course. I just don’t see the need for only buses or mostly buses.
As a minor detail, tires are one of the top polluters of both microplastics and noise levels in cities, and it would be nice to lower the amount of them being disintegrated in the process of moving people from place to place - be in from buses, or the larger culprit, private vehicles.
I’ve been using Jerboa for that reason. Condensed information so I’m not constantly scrolling.
What’s Connect look like for you?
For further than bike distance, it’s confounding why cities don’t have a tram system.
If something is being moved from one place to another, and back again, you would of course look for more efficient ways to move that thing. Use a box.
When there’s dozens of those things making the same trip, put them together in the same transport method. It’s not complicated. Factories don’t have people moving one product at a time to the next station. They have conveyor belts or similar to accomplish the task.
When needed, sure, have an electric car that someone could drive. But it’s not necessary for a good portion of the population.
I can’t say I’ve seen any people ‘forcing’ others to go out and replace a perfectly functional combustion car with an electric one - the manufacturers maybe. Most of the conversation I see is focused on the lack of low cost options when it’s time to purchase a brand new vehicle. Gas and electric both.
Once you move away from the brand new discussion, it seems pretty well agreed that keeping what you’ve got is the best option environmentally and financially. Buying used being a close second.
Freedom is important. But when the industry only offers you trucks and SUVs, where’s your choice?
Agreed. The whole idea of these huge payouts could be eliminated and replaced with what exists for everyone else - severance pay. Calculated off a regulated minimum formula, based primarily on how long the person served the company.
I also agree with you that the top and bottom salaries should have a correlation. The C suite making the salary of a shelf stocker in one day should not happen. I think I could accept that the top gets somewhere around 10 or 20 times higher salary. Even 100x would be an improvement to the way it is now.
Like you point out, between stock options and whatever else, an executive salary could be a few hundred thousand, even if their total compensation is tens of millions. In fantasy land it would be nice if, once a company grows to a certain point, say a billion dollars in value, if it were required to convert to an employee owned cooperative entity.
It’s a shame things are the way they are. Maybe one day we won’t have politicians that can be bought. That’s a different discussion altogether.