interesting - didn't see that
From what I understand, that is not the case. Any email that is unsolicited would be considered spam.
The SPCA, for example, was commenting that they don't have the resources to get permission to satisfy the law.
Canada passed a new law regarding spam in electronic messages (in particular, email) starting July 1
The companies that are effected are legitimate ones who do business in Canada
The onus on proving you have permission to send an email is on the company sending it.
There has been a flurry of activity wanting permissions recently due to the legislation.
It seems that nobody really knows what it means to be identified as a spammer.
Microsoft is probably thinking - to hell with it; the risk is too high. The RSS is good enough.
Mazda has stated it is not going to spend money on EV so - it is Nissan.
Also, that Mazda could be changing it's mind would be news on its own.
I got 8 years out of my car before the engine broke (warped block).
Out of warranty... and apparently most of the nissan 2.5 litre engines crap out at 120k
I expected 10-15 years out the car and I got 8! Engines are minimum $5k installed on a car that's worth $3-4k max.
I guess I should have expected 5 years and sold it to some other poor sap.
yay gas engines!
PS. yes I take care of my cars.
The simulation is uncanny! I noticed that there is only 1 planet with life on it!
If all you are worried about is cultural bias, don't worry about it. I'm in my mid 40s and I've been in start-ups for much of my career. If you have the skills they are looking for and the product(s) interests you, you will fit in well enough. If all that interests you is your offspring, you won't. (That applies to pubs/golf courses/spas too).
You will have insight into problems that the 20 somethings will never have. You will have strategies that are different and desires that are refined for the products you work on. That is nothing to be shy or ashamed of. You will learn - they will learn. It's called win-win.
IMHO 300 employees is not a start-up in tech. There's bound to be many old-timers hidden from view - probably eating other peoples lunches.
Perhaps the world would be better off without Facebook as it is today, and thus Zuckerberg made a mistake that we all pay for.
Money isn't the only marker for best possible choices. Regular thieves would be identified for their incredible brilliance all the time if that were the case.
specifically, "this make a judgement that it is better off not being depressed in this world"
maybe someone can see the whole thing, but not with beta
It is very depressing especially when you invoke religion.
I think it is better for people to be depressed that deluded.
That, my friend, sounds like a challenge!
clearly you don't drive.
nice theory, but I think it doesn't quite hold up. Specifically cheap doesn't mean better for the environment.
unfortunately much of what is cheap today is only on loan from future clean-up-costs. That is not factored in the costs now. Not even a bit.
However, cheap is better in other ways.
Drink water from a creek.
Cool off by sweating.
Sit on the ground.
I also suspect that the longevity of an electric car (besides the battery) can outlast a conventional one by a long time given there are so many fewer parts. So quality plays into it. I think it is a simplification that electric cars are more expensive. They probably will not remain that way from a price point either. I think that it is foolish to think that batteries are equivalent to consumable like gasoline. There are similarities, of course, but they are very different.
Even with rough calculations of other technologies, take something recent that has changed quite a bit, like plasma tvs - 10 years ago, they were $10k or more - now, a much better one is available for $1k. If electric cars follow that trend, they will be $5k-$10k in 10 years, and they will be better. The people today buying these are allowing that technology to develop. The people who aren't are possibly Luddites.
I think that it has been revised a few times in the last year and projections are higher than what was hoped - and no decline in the next century (although a slowing is expected).
There is a nice chart here: http://www.unfpa.org/pds/trends.htm
It is projected to reach 8.1 billion in 2025, and to further increase to 9.6 billion in 2050 and 10.9 billion by 2100
1.39 kilowatt hr / year per person in the USA
If everyone globally uses the same (similar) amount, which is reasonable, it will require about 5x more power that currently used globally. That assumes a lot of things, of course.
Projections are fun!
Just think how dumb they'd be without the internet!
People are a lot 'smarter' than before. There is no doubt. "Just google it" first requires the person to acknowledge they don't know something, and forming a question about that something. Then reading about it. Comprehension may be weak, but there is something more there than before. All of these traits are what we used to call 'smart'.
I'm certain beyond a doubt that computers have given people (those that have them) a HUGE advantage.
I'm remembering people who couldn't read, others who wouldn't admit they don't know something, and people who spouted nonsense. All of those people still exist. But now-a-days only the spouting of nonsense has increased. And the nonsense can be quickly - on the spot - fact checked.