![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
I’ve adopted a policy of buying the latest iPhone every 5 years, which is about how long they tend to last in my experience. So far it’s worked out well.
I’ve adopted a policy of buying the latest iPhone every 5 years, which is about how long they tend to last in my experience. So far it’s worked out well.
There are considerable safety concerns regarding private jets, mostly down to the quality of the pilots. At the bigger airlines, pilots are unionized and have consistent schedules they work and routes and aircraft they fly. It’s reliable work and where most pilots (even military) end up.
Meanwhile private aviation needs to be flexible and easy to set up. Contrary to your comment this is the sector that you can usually expect to find more unscrupulous operations and pilots who are basically just Some Guy. Most of the near miss accidents lately have involved private planes (though that can often be attributed to problems in the ATC network).
As for the doors that’s more of a Boeing specific problem, they’ve made a lot of questionable business decisions in recent years and this is the fallout of that. Airbus planes don’t seem to have this problem, and customers seem to be making it clear that they would like their planes to work thank you very much.
Is this like a high fantasy setting or a more sci-fi one. I’ve had this for the former. Though with a number of different vehicles.
They pollute more than you think, and using concrete is very rare in certain parts of the world. Outside of elevated roads I’ve never seen in used in my area or any part of the northern US.
I must say, you’re the first person I’ve seen to cite ChatGPT as a source.
I literally just told you two things that make them more dangerous, what makes them safer?
I don’t fully understand why SUVs are more profitable. What makes them worth more than a minivan or wagon for instance. I know premium versions of both those vehicle types exist (actually I’m pretty sure some of the only new wagons you can buy today are from premium German brands.)
We would also have to get rid of tires to do that, tires pollute a lot. And roads too, heavier vehicles wear out roads faster, and asphalt requires petroleum products to produce.
I’d wager most people have been in one considering how common they are, doesn’t make them any less terrible. Size is definitely a problem, they are very space inefficient, and quite dangerous. The center of gravity is very high, and because the front end is high up, anyone hit by it is more likely to end up under the vehicle. The solution is to lower them down to make them safer, and replace them with safer and more efficient vehicles like station wagons and minivans.
This community is by far my favorite part of Lemmy, and you’re one of my favorite posters here.
That makes you among my favorite Lemmy posters. Do your damndest to have a good Thanksgiving.
Georgeism
If you live in a place where this is becoming the norm, that’s exactly what you do.
A far more above board and less vibes-based way to pay.
It’s important to require disclosure of the service fee. In my experience usually listed at the bottom of the menu. I know at least in some instances there are crowdsourced master lists of restaurants with hidden fees, and enforcement of disclosure requirements seems to have stepped up.
I actually support phasing tips out for service fees, less dodgy and less influenced by cognitive biases from customers toward certain genders or ethnicities of staff.
Highball!
One of my favorite things about Reddit was that whenever two Germans found each other in a comment section they would always start a long reply chain in German. I always thought it was cute.
&&&&&
They’re not responsible for fixing the problem, but they are responsible for ensuring that the problem is fixed, since until it’s fixed the don’t have hot water.
In this case ensuring that the problem is fixed most importantly entails telling the person who has to do the fixing as much about the problem as possible.
If you need help with something, you have to help your helper if you want it to be effective.
True, I’d expect pretty wild conspiracies like flat earth and chemtrails to be laughed at here, but a disturbing number of lemmings and even progressives in general follow a set of less outlandish - but more insidious - conspiracies that usually fall into the “collusion and malice” type. I could say that General Motors et al. killed most of the US passenger rail and streetcar systems, and most people here would accept that as a fact. Case closed, capitalism is evil and should be abolished, every bad thing is cause by someone with I’ll intentions making it worse.
I, however, tend to be suspicious of those sorts of takes in general. Returning to the alleged “streetcar conspiracy”I’ve actually done quite a lot of research into this and can decidedly say that the primary cause of the decline of mass transit in the US was… There were at least 5 primary causes, none of which were shadowy groups deliberately working to destroy it. Rather it was killed by a changing urban environment, failures to adapt to modal shifts, legacy streetcar systems just generally sucking, and local governments taking transit for granted and assuming that they can hold streetcar companies to exacting standards while expecting them to remain solvent, all while not considering it their problem.
I could go on, and can send some sources and references (maybe not direct links though) if you’d like to learn more. But my main point is that far too many people assume there’s a nefarious actor pulling the strings the whole time when it’s usually several factors lining up all the holes in the Swiss cheese and creating a negative externality we still talk about to this day.
There (usually) isn’t a conspiracy, and if there is it’s unlikely to be anywhere near as all-encompassing as you think. People say there is because it gives them someone to blame, helps channel their anger at something tangible, and just makes a good story.
So I read through the article, and it seems like this guy has a lot of selection bias. He makes the claim that nothing is done about right-wing protesters, but completely ignores that the J6 trials happened, and right-wing extremists do actually face charges for violent or criminal acts.
He also spends more time on that than elaborating on his claim that “inequality demands oppression” or talking about that in greater analytical detail.
This just seems like ragebait.