I'll bite on this one. Uber and Lyft are similar, but as shitty as Uber is as a company, they offer a better service. My reasoning? Lyft does not set the rate up front. It's still a range, and you still see surge charging. You still have the option of tipping (and are encouraged to), which is a shitty way to not pay your employees and to pass that responsibility onto your customers. Uber on the other hand ties all of that up into an upfront package. You have a set price before you accept (meaning the driver can't drive you out of your way to increase the bill), and there's no tip question at the end. If Uber raised their rates to treat their contractors better, there would be no contest, performance wise. I realize these are minor changes, but uber has taken a lot of the trouble out of the cab industry. I wish Lyft would copy their (trip) payment model. That said, Uber's CEOs an out of touch asshole, and neither Uber or Lyft treat their employees like proper employees.

Agreed. The article definitely leans towards this being more devious than the data itself shows, but they do admit, the data is very anecdotal. As much as I dislike Trump, this isn't a smoking gun but more of a report of someone hearing a bang. It could be a crime, it could be (car analogy) be a car backfiring. I'll be curious to see how this shakes out.

My first thought was that these would get bought up for amenity spaces in high end multifamily housing. For a single home, sure, it's a ton. But we're already spending $50k on a roof top patch of turf to allow dogs to use the restroom (I'm sadly not even kidding here), why not spend a bit more on something that is slightly more useful?

FYI, he did come out as the financier for that lawsuit, which did bankrupt Gawker. Whether or not that was his specific intention, I couldn't say, but he did have an ax to grind and subsequently bury in Gawker. Non-gawker related source below:

http://www.npr.org/2016/05/26/...

To your point, and to kilfarsnar's original comment - His argument is that laws like this target the poor because they are enforced only on the poor and not the rich. That, because they are poor, they have to jump through many more hoops. If you are rich, you are assumed to be doing well, and get a free pass.

I'm taking this a little wider than you intended, I apologize. Being jailed for being poor happens. For a well written, fact checked article on it, please see the following (warning: pdf) https://www.splcenter.org/site...

For a more humorous, assuming you can laugh at the absurdity of it all, take on this, please see the recent John Oliver clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

But for personal anecdote, I remember riding a bus and hearing a homeless person rant and rave about how if you have no money, you are breaking the law here. It sounds silly, until you think about how in many places, if you don't have money, you have no place to sleep, and there are a wealth of laws prohibiting sleeping in public places. Or if you need a restroom and there are no public bathrooms available, where do you go? Or if you are in an area and not buying something, what are you doing? Loitering?

This headline brought to you by the department of redundancy department.

Because I forgot to add a source: http://www.politifact.com/pund...

Thank god most fast food workers are well out of high school. Most are in their upper 20s. Good jobs are hard to come by these days. I'm thankful every day for mine, even as I slowly sink towards lower class in this city.

And to add further damage beyond the reduction of manufacturing jobs, focusing only on reducing costs results in a throw away culture. If you lower the costs enough, you remove incentive to actually fix anything that's broken. That's fewer repair jobs and far more waste.

I'm not sure if you're joking or are honest here. The idea of storing off-peak energy is to save up energy that is being created when there isn't demand. Which is exactly what you are saying, and exactly what is being done here. I'm curious how nuanced this is. Other systems push water into higher reservoirs, which they later flow through turbines to create electricity.

I'm not sure where you're seeing this outrage from, or where you're assuming that genetics is that important. TFS (you didn't even have to click through to TFA) repeatedly states that these genetic factors are minor, especially when compared to environmental factors, or

. But don't let that stop you from your passive aggressive racism there.

You're looking for math advice in the logic of a man who willfully (and wonderfully) fucked with the English language to its breaking point. What he likely means is that the density of the universe is basically zero, because, using your modification, the number of prime numbers is infinite, but it grows by a factor slower than the number of numbers. therefore the percentage of prime numbers compared to numbers as x approaches infinity is such a low percentage that it practically becomes zero.

Anywho, it's meant to be comedy, but if you would ever like to bet on us meeting intelligent life within several generations, let me know. I'd like to set up a college fund for my great-great-grandchildren. Space is big and remarkably empty. The only thing larger than it might be their student loans.

We might not be that complex, but we're still outside of the norm. Which means that even though the total number of beings like us might be numerous, it's still rare. To quote Douglas Adams who does a much better job of describing this: