The Federal Reserve is only getting a response rate of approximately 42% when it sends out its surveyes. Since they only send out a little over one thousand surveys, trying to guesstimate policy for an entire country based on that response rate is effectively impossible.

First, their sample size is too small to begin with. They should sample at least three times the number they currently do. Second, who they sample also needs expanded. Getting a response from Corning is significantly different than getting a response from Billy Bob's Downhome Fried Chicken in Bumfook, Louisiana.

This lack of response, as this article relates, carries over into people getting surveys. Being asked 5-10 questions is far different than being given a booklet of 100 questions to answer. You need to make it easy for people to respond. Blind calling no longer works, as many on here have pointed out. Send people a letter with uniquely identifiable information they can use to complete a survey online. Since they won't be handing out their personal information it will make it easier for people to respond. Just use the code given and keep it down to a few questions.

The term "thread" in this context is older than Slashdot. It originated on usenet, before the web existed.

> "Proves" might be too strong

Different fields have different standards of proof. The most rigorous that I'm aware of, is in mathematics, wherein a proposal that almost all the experts think must surely end up being true, can be heavily studied and yet remain "unproven" for an arbitrarily large number of centuries, until eventually someone finds an actual real-world use case for the math that you get if it's NOT true. (The poster child for this is non-Euclidean geometry, but there are lots of other examples.)

There's an old joke about three university professors from England who took a trip up north together, and on their way out of the train station, the journalism professor looked over at some livestock grazing on a hill, and said, "Oh, look, the sheep in Scotland are black!" The biology professor corrected him, "Some of the sheep in Scotland are black." But the math professor said, "There exist at least three ship in Scotland, and at least three of them appear black on at least one side, at least some of the time."

The one quibble I have with USB-C is the pin doesn't seat far enough into a device. It's one thing if the connection is vertical. The pin is sitting in the port. However, when plugged in sidewarys, that itsy bitsy pin now has to bear all the weight of the cable pulling it down.

To me, that seems like stress which doesn't need to be there.

Sorry, no, that isn't the issue either. The problem the OP is running into is much, much more basic than that.

Forget, for a moment, that the ports are USB ports, and that the peripherals are USB peripherals, because as long as they match up (which they do, in the OP's scenario), none of that is the problem. The number of ports doesn't even matter, we can abstract away the 4 (or 2 + 2, same difference) and just call it N. The problem is that he's got N ports, and N peripherals that he wants to keep plugged into ports all the time, and that leaves N - N ports available to plug anything else into, if he needs to plug something in temporarily. But N - N is 0, so something has to be unplugged to free one up. That's a number-of-ports problem, entirely irrespective of the port type.

If you were proposing replacing the 2 USB-A ports with a *larger* number of USB-C ports, then your argument might have some relevance. But just changing the type of port won't bend the arithmetic in any useful direction. They could be upgraded to the new USB type K ports introduced in 2042, and it still wouldn't solve the problem: if there are still four ports and four all-the-type peripherals, there still won't be any unoccupied ports available for temporarily plugging in transitory things.

At least USB is (mostly) hot-pluggable. But, again, that's as true of A as it is of C.

I'm willing to suffer through the transition, but so help me God, if they come out with a USB-D port right after we finish transitioning to USB-C, then that's it! I'm never doing this again!

This is retarded.

1. It isn't for profit healthcare that is the problem, it's THIRD PARTY PAY.
2. I don't use third party pay, ever, for healthcare. I've been insured nonstop for over 30 years, and NEVER ONCE has my insurer paid my doctor.
3. Even when I've had emergencies, I still called around, negotiated a fair cash up front rate, paid cash up front, and billed it to my insurer. My cash up front rate was sometimes below any co-pay negotiated with my insurer, lol.

I just recently had some elective surgery that would have cost me about $2000 on my annual deductible, but I was able to cash pay a negotiated rate of $400 including a follow-up "free". I submitted the $400 to my insurer and they reimbursed me.

Third party insurance exists because YOU VOTERS demanded the HMO Act of the 1970s, which tied health care to employment, and then employers outsourced it to third parties.

Health care is remarkably cheap in the US (cash pay, negotiated) and I don't have to wait months to see a doctor when I call and say I am cash pay. They bump me up fast.

While your hypothesis looks nice at first glance, it has a glaring hole: Experiments with turbine powered cars had ended before the first NOx legislation. The Chrysler Turbine Car dates from 1963. At the same time in the UK, Rover debuted the P6, which was engineered to host the Rover gas turbine, which was tested in a Rover P4 as the T2, T3 and T4 prototypes, but it never came to pass. Then you have some experiments with gas turbine powered race cars until 1968. The Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act was enacted in 1965.

The experiments to put gas turbines into cars for sale ended two years before NOx mandates were enacted. They were continued for race cars, which aren't affected by the mandates, but fizzled out a few years later.

Step 1: pay AI for "code"
Step 2: pay actual dev to fix "code" ...
Step 4: give CEO bonus!

And this is called the amplitude.

and barely knows what it is or how to pronounce it like an everyday term normal people use.

At this point, he's barely cognizant of where he's at.

Depends on what you are talking about. Are you talking wavelength or amplitude?

The Nissan Ariya is based on the same platform (AmpR Medium) as for instance the Renault Scénic E Tech and the Renault A390. It was formerly known as Renault–Nissan Common Module Family (CMF) EV. It is a shared platform with Dongfeng Motor Corporation. In July 2025, Dongfeng and Nissan formed Dongfeng Nissan. One of the products coming from its assembly lines is - tada! - the Nissan Ariya.

The question being: Will you be able get an U.S. or Japanese EV then which is not based on Chinese technology? And does it make sense to keep up a mindset adapted to internal combustion engines in an era of electrical cars? Do you know which parts usually wear out and fail in EVs, and after which time? The Nissan Leaf is not a good example. It was prone to battery wear far above the expected rate. Newer EVs have battery wear far below the expected rate. And do you know when the innovation in EV design slows down so far that it makes sense to keep parts for 15 or 20 year old cars? 15 years ago, Tesla was selling the Tesla Roadster, basically an EV conversion of the Lotus Elise, co-developed by AC Propulsion and Lotus. Do you need spare parts for a Tesla Roadster? The first EV to ever sell in large numbers, the Tesla Model S, is not even 15 year old right now.

My prediction is that you will buy an EV just because they will be cheaper to get and cheaper to operate than a comparable ICE car, and repairs far into the future will be a very second thought. At the moment, we have price parity, that means the same amount of money gets you the same amount of new car in both worlds. In five years time, this will also be true for the used car market.

Everyone knows what the MKV format is. It's something they use every day. No need to offer an explanation of what MKV offers compared to other formats. It's as clear as granite.