It seems obvious to me that gig workers aren't really employees, and it's also obvious that they aren't fully independent contractors either. Why are the courts, lawmakers, the workers themselves, the companies... ALL of them, constantly trying to declare that gig workers are one or the other? Why isn't it possible to have a third option? Nobody seems to even throw the idea out there.

Big-ass caps kinda solve (or, well... smooth over) this problem on A/C compressors. Never seen an aftermarket one set to fit a freezer compressor, but the same principle should apply.

One of the excellent things that subsidies can do is to _actually_ make things cheaper. Some things we want are too expensive _because_ they're too expensive. By temporarily artificially lowering the customer cost, you ramp up economies of scale and dramatically lower the 'real' cost. Solar panels, for example, are now absolutely dirt cheap compared to just 10 years ago. Yes, storage is still a problem, there are other technical issues, etc etc. Point is, the subsidies may be required to _quickly_ bring the prices into a better economic range for some things, but it's absolutely not true that these things will only _stay_ economic with the subsidies.

True, but in reality the vast majority of people don't know that's even an option. Consumers believe you get apps from the Play Store. Period, end of story. Even those who _do_ know you can just download an APK have to be _super_ wary about what you actually install from an unknown source. If you're an app developer, there's basically no point in distributing outside Play unless you're aiming something at other developers, or, well. Porn stuff. It's still a monopoly that takes an outrageous cut of payments, even if there is a little bit of a loophole.

1U, 2U, and 4U. Of course, there's an infinite realm of creativity in depth, so go hog-wild there.

It's so easy to look at that number as such a tiny fraction... and to scoff at "It'll be gone if we do this 1000 times!", knowing that more and more is getting added every day. It's so easy to despair at all of this when it seems most of the world is willing to make things worse to save even a penny off their bottom line.

But hey, these people did a thing and the world is a better place for it. Got to give them props for that, even if it doesn't feel like much.

From the article -- even the blurb slashdot posted, which you didn't read:

This does not include seasoning during the cooking process

Seriously, at least read the goddamn excerpt if you are going to comment, and calm the fuck down while you're at it. This is about people who just immediately pick up the shaker and dump EXTRA salt on everything without even tasting it (I know some folks like that).

Having traveled extensively throughout the rural US, where roundabouts have gotten installed surprisingly often recently, you generally hear the following two things from the locals: A> They used to have to wait forever to get through the stop sign there, but now they don't, and B> They HATE the roundabout. They see no cognitive dissidence in voicing both of these things.

*shrug* People are dumb and don't like change. Roundabouts can sometimes be a bit tricky for me to time right with my 5th wheel if the traffic is heavy, but even then, 100% prefer to a stop sign. Lots of other good traffic/intersections have been implemented too -- See Rangeline+I-44 in Joplin, MO, that's a fun intersection that the locals also hate, even though it moves (smoothly) a great deal of traffic.

The impression I get, having spent time in several different states and both urban and rural areas over the course of the pandemic, is that mask mandates don't really affect whether or not people wear masks. Not surprising they don't work if they don't cause any change in the % of people masking up. There is, unfortunately, much less data available on _actual_ prevalence of mask-wearing.

As a general rule, anyone who "raises questions" about "the government line" -- or anything else for that matter -- with very scary sounding claims but not even a tiny shred of evidence... _is_ almost certainly wrong and quite likely malicious. Don't have to be too much of a free thinker to figure that out.

What makes you think any of what you described in 'meatspace' is illegal? It's not, in the US, anyway. PERHAPS could be considered under harassment or stalking laws if it was very blatent, but if you are in public, you are subject to anyone recording/photographing you and what you are doing, pretty much.

Leaving aside, for the moment, the question of whether or not a virus is 'life' -- this question would apply to a bacterial disease as well -- how is this any different than the attempts in the last century to eradicate the North American wolf? They were dangerous (and quite inconvenient) to humans. Thankfully (to some...) we failed, and many people are happy they are returning. The reasons we wanted them gone haven't changed (although hardly as much an issue with the hugely reduced numbers).

If it's not OK to eradicate a species that looks like the family dog, what about if they were squirrel-sized? Insects? Where's the line, exactly, where we say 'OK, on this side, it's good and right to completely remove this species from existence, but on the other side of the line, it's a 'protected species' to be preserved, and we just control it? One could argue that wolves served a purpose in the ecosystem by controlling deer and other game population -- but honestly, we will never allow the grey wolf population to grow to a number to have any real effect on that anymore.

Not really taking a side on whether or not to eliminate the stocks we have of smallpox, but I feel like there certainly is an ethical question in whether or not it's OK to do so.

(As a side note, I think 'genocide' only applies to killing humans, but you get the idea, I'm sure)

You think they'd submit some totally bogus/badly written requests just for the court to reject to make the optics on the numbers look better. It's not like the actual details get released on any of this. This is how little the gov't gives a shit (and how little the people give a shit either, since this is barely 'news' outside Techdirt and the like).... they can't even be bothered to do the small amount of work to FAKE oversight...

Just sayin...

Most criticisms 'scrubbed' from that page are really just unfavorable comparisons to other languages, which are subjective and, imho, don't really belong in a wikipedia article on a topic anyway. Wikipedia is not a place to list every grievance anyone has on a particular topic.