I’m conflicted on this. On one hand, there are clear problems with the electoral college situation right now, but on the other hand, getting rid of it means that the tyranny of the majority will become a bigger problem. It’s unclear to me which is worse or how we can fix the latter.
Same. I keep thinking back to my time TAing for an intro programming course and getting students who just add random braces until their code compiles. That’s me right now with Rust pointers.
I have no idea what I’m even missing out on by not paying for Discord but others are happy to pay for it, so I think that’s a pretty reasonable offering. I can’t speak for the YouTube and Tiktok example though since I don’t use those.
I think the idea is that if you create the demand for hydrogen, then there will be more incentive to produce cheap and environmentally friendly hydrogen.
Exclusive or would mean that if the owner happens to sell at exactly 25 years, then there’s no need to repay. It wouldn’t make sense.
Based on the other comments, it sounds like you mean “and” rather than “xor”?
Colloquially, average is the mean. Mathematically, average can be either mean, median, or mode.
OP described their beliefs and is looking for a name for it, not the other way around.
That’s how they keep you from climbing the ranks. You need to take a loss for a while before things can actually get better, and you never know if it’ll be possible for you to get over that hump.
It seems very inefficient to have them transcribe audio when they could just add timestamps to the script.
Maybe chickpeas are expensive where you live, or maybe you miscalculated. Either way, take a look at my numbers for comparison.
We can get a 3.63kg bag of chickpeas here for $7.49 (CAD). Assuming you fulfill all your Calorie and protein needs from chickpeas alone (2500 Calories and 150g protein per day), it comes out to about $600/year. That’s $1.64/day. In order to be $10/day, you’d have to pay 6x as much for your chickpeas, so that same 3.63kg bag would have to cost $45.50.
More variety in your diet is likely to always be superior to less. That goes for both kids and adults. The trouble with younger kids is that deficiencies can impact their development and have more severe long term consequences, and they’re also less capable of seeking out foods to fill that gap.
I suspect a big part of it is that he actually acknowledged that people are having problems, while Hilary decided to go “America is already great” as if their problems aren’t real.
I would argue that this would make nurses less important, and would make them “lazy” by not giving them opportunities to identify these simple things on a regular basis.
Not just nurses, but doctors too. This exact problem was discussed at a conference I recently attended. Some doctors do better with AI assistance, some do worse. As far as we know, it seems to be dependent on how much they “believe in AI”. The more they do, the worse they perform when assisted.
While true on paper, they don’t have any actual power here.
In theory, the value they create is in handling all the home maintenance. Of course, many of them don’t do their jobs in practice.
I mean, this is how businesses work in general. If you don’t buy their products/services, then they wouldn’t be able to continue providing them.
I understand that we’re trying to draw attention to exploitative landlords, but if anyone can afford to keep their property regardless of whether or not you pay rent, it’s the exploitative ones.
Better for the company doesn’t necessarily mean it’s worse for you.
But where does the extra money and infrastructure come from to provide everything they need?
What is money in the first place? It represents labour and resources. So when a new person shows up, they themselves provide the money in the form of their labour. They are the money.
Doesn’t sound that weird. More people means more people to serve, so more service jobs are needed.
Or maybe had to simultaneously work multiple full time jobs and a weekend job to make ends meet?