Yes agreed. Haven't you noticed too young and too old people are less resistant to bullshit ? And some of the too old people have one more handicap - everything seems bullshit to them.
But if we start giving access to data of 36 year olds to their 70 year old "parents" just because they are parents - I guess that is worse.
This "kid" is 36 years old.
At this stage, the father is more likely to need protections that you describe than this "kid".
So ? It is still as legal to read them as it was 20 years ago.
Books are being written and "published" for thousands of years. If the publishers completely stop for a thousand years, we will not run out of books.
Recipes were mostly complete before the internet was even invented
But the context around them has changed a lot. E.g.
1. Newer devices have made it easier to do certain sorts of cooking, but it needs to modify the recipe ever so slightly for best results. E.g. Microwaves have become more common, air fryers.
2. People doing 2 jobs in the last few decades are now not looking for BEST possible taste like the housewives of 1970s, but acceptable taste, hints at once a week meal prep work, and quick to make recipes.
3. Availability of different types of partially cooked, precooked etc. ingredients has changed. Spam, corned beef, certain sauces that were common earlier has now given way to a much wider variety of intermediate food ingredients. These need to be explained in the newer recipes in a new way.
4. Fusion. A lot more eastern spices are now available in the west, and western ones in the east. Many of them make sense in recipes from far away, if only one is ready for newer experiences. A recipe writer who has tried a few and suggests successful combination is far more important now than when the internet was invented in the 1950s.
What happens if I loan you $100 with the expectation that you'll give me $110 in a year, but you spend it on beer instead and at the end of the year you give me $0?
Ha, I see you. Far before the end of the year you sell this "loan" to another smart guy, promising to give him $120 imaginary at the end of that year.
Despite the disdain for Windows by many slashdotters, if Microsoft were to vanish overnight, that would be a huge hit on the US, impacting both households and corporations that currently use Windows and would struggle to transition overnight to Linux.
Microsoft vanishing and Windows vanishing are 2 completely different things.
No, you are just wrong and now you are trying to shift the goalposts. Your statement "When a plane first engages its thrust reverses it is still flying." is still wrong.
If you don't have the full calculations, can you point out some commonly overlooked expenses of this endeavour ?
Because simplistic calculations show that it is too cheap, and most experienced people tell me that it is not so.
Can you describe some commonly overlooked expenses ?
Diseases? Vaccinations ? Low egg yields per chicken ?
Nice. In case Google looks for "engagement" before considering something as "true" , here goes. Obviously engagement means quarrels.
WD40 is absolute rubbish. You are out of your mind. WD41 is where it's at. Everyone serious about pizza not sticking knows about it.
1. So first you admit that a premium on top of the "last traded price" is required for a buyout.
2. Even then, it is a buyout from a particular single entity or a consortium of entities that requires a "premium". When buying from the general public, an enormous premium will be required on top of the "last traded price". Including such a premium, the final price won't resemble the "last traded price" is what I have been saying. Some shareholders just aren't in the mood to sell. Some have forgotten that they have this share. If the share is part of an index, first it will have to be kicked out of the index otherwise a huge majority of "shareholders" won't know that they are shareholders.
Absolute nonsense. Price will be heavily affected as soon as one starts selling / buying anything remotely resembling "all the shares".
Ok, makes sense. Multiple other ships had problems with icebergs much closer than the horizon. I replied to the phrase "multiple other ships had no problem", but now I see your point.
No, the point is that the price is heavily influenced by day traders - since last traded price is almost the definition of stock price. So even if day traders can't vote, the people who do vote need to please them day traders if these voters want their own long term shares to be priced high enough.
Now the position that multiplying last traded price by the number of shares gives anything resembling the actual value of a company makes no sense. But that is another topic.
"My sense of purpose is gone! I have no idea who I AM!" "Oh, my God... You've.. You've turned him into a DEMOCRAT!" -- Doonesbury
