They wouldn’t be able to finish stealing that car before a thousand hungry lawyers ate them alive. Why do we let media companies do that?

They would probably actually have a decent shot at getting away with it, at least at first.

And to answer your question, it’s because the anger that companies generate by doing this shit ends up turning into piracy. Why would you try to punish a corp for doing this (likely wasting your time) when a cheap VPN and basic tech literacy gets you what you want?

The effort ratios are way out of wack when it comes to digital products. It’s easy to get around digital bullshitery, not so much in the real world where we are all car dependant.

I don’t think there are enough such edge cases for it to make sense for it to be legal.

If a corp needs an employee to be that close, then they should hire local, and/or rotate staff.

At a bare minimum, I agree, no corp should profit off of housing.

That’s how a lot of co-ops works. Or maybe it’s called non-market rental. I don’t remember the exact name but it’s definitely a thing.

Either way, landlord parasites are not needed.

restricting corporations from purchases, banning Airbnb (yes, they drive prices up, and if you use them, you are contributing to it), penalizing if unit is not occupied (though enforcement of this will be hard), or banning foreign investors.

Agreed, we should be doing all of those things. Corporations should not be able to own any kind of housing at all, and multi unit buildings should be under non-profit co-ops.

And to penalize unoccupied housing, we should have a georgist taxation system.

One day I’ll have more to do and you people will be rid of me.

And that day will be a sad one.

Instead of hotdogs, get something that actually has taste. Either bratwurst or hot Italian sausage.

Our electoral system is inherently biased against 3rd party candidates due to the spoiler effect of first past the post voting. The only solution is election reform that regulates election finances, a switch to approval/STAR voting, and regulation on political ads.

It’s only going to be a matter of time before they start requiring contracts, forcing you to stick with a service for long periods or face fees for dropping them.

They are capitalists, and so they must always profit more and more, never ending, for all of time. One of the things they will eventually do to hit that unsustainable proift motive is contracts. It’s what the cable companies did, and it’s only a matter of time.

Even uncontacted tribes in the middle of nowhere islands probably have microplastics in their blood too. After all, they likely are eating animals that have microplastics. Stuff like this always gets worse the higher up the food chain you get, and humans are pretty high up.

What I am saying is, I don’t think people who use duolingo are any better/worse off than most other methods.

I think that would go for most learning methods. When you don’t practice a skill you’re always going to get worse with it over time, especially if it is a language.

Doable but you need teachers to open source their lessons and vet them.

If an OS alternative was trying to completely replace duolingo, it would need far more than that. Duolingo has had extensive work put into listening and speaking lessons. Almost all lessons have a listening componentwhich is a ton of content to make up for. They have significantly better voice recognition than my phone. The amount of effort to get something like that working for a language, let alone dozens of languages is a high bar.

Take a look at any of the job postings that duolingo has, they’re only looking for Google employee level of skill for a reason (aside from how fucked the job market is).

It’s not impossible for duolingo to be replaced with an open source version, but it’s a giant undertaking.

There are temperature/humidity ranges that make it impossible for any human to be able to cool themselves off through sweating. If we surpass that point and don’t have AC, all humans experiencing that temperature/humidity will die after a period of time.

Nobody is safe when the atmosphere itself is lethal to human life.

http://climate-preparedness.com/understanding-wet-bulb-temperature-and-why-it-is-so-dangerous/

The dictation software we have is pretty shitty though. It almost always needs proof-read, or re-dictated several times to get it right. At that point you may as well just send an audio clip.

Until the day that dictation software gets it 100% correct, it’s not going to be worth my time.

For now, the human on the other end will always have an easier time understand an audio clip than a machine, because human minds are more capable of using context and getting past regional accents.

/s

And for those unaware, the cost of homelessness does exist, and it is quite high. We pay for it through emergency services (police, doctors, ambulance, hospital beds), waste removal services, etc.

The problem needs fixed, and part of the solution is commie blocks unironically.

Things aren’t tough yet. Wait until the effects if climate change absolutely destroy our shore lines, food and water supply, etc.

Freedom is inherently dangerous

Only to a degree. Letting your child run free on a playground is significantly less dangerous than letting them run free in a hazardous waste landfill. We can absolutely design safe and free places. We just need to stop designing our cities for the sole use of hazardous waste (cars).

We need to allow more mixed zoning so that we don’t have to travel 20 minutes by bike to get to the store, alleviating the drive to ride as fast as possible.

Not only would that eliminate the need for speed, but it would also reduce the overall number of trips taken by bike. Less trips means less crashes. Same goes for cars.

Add it to the never ending list of benefits to mixed use zoning.

In addition to RiderExMachina’s point, an e-bike will get you to your destination quicker, and with less effort. With how hot things are getting, it’s much more preferable to not arrive sweaty as hell due to how much work it can take, plus it’s better to spend less time in the heat.

I don’t think safety courses and licensing are a huge barrier to entry though, unless we let them be.

Training and licenses generally aren’t free, and e-bikes are already pretty expensive. It would add quite enough of a barrier to entry to dissuade more people from switching to them, which is something the environment cannot afford. We honestly need to be doing everything in our power as quickly as possible.

And yes, training and a license would indeed make a difference with how riders conduct themselves. Including wearing a helmet or paying attention.

I’ve seen plenty of car drivers on the road who presumably have a license, yet they don’t wear seat-belts, don’t pay attention, turn in places they shouldn’t, speed, etc. The first step should be infrastructure changes to increase the number of protected/dedicated bike trails (which in turn allow accidents to happen safely), built in speed limiters, rules on helmets and speed, mixed use zoning to reduce trip count/speed/cars, etc. Such changes don’t have an impact on barrier to entry or and only a negligible effect on our freedom.

Traveling by bike is one of the few ways you can travel without having the government involved in some way, or at least minimally involved. I’d like it to stay that way.

And like I said earlier, most of these injuries are to the rider themselves, which means they were probably doing something stupid in the first place. People are going to be stupid even with a license and training, so we may as well design around it as a first step.

I have a cat. It likes to get into things I don’t want it to. I could theoretically teach it not to do so, but the far simpler option is to keep the layout of my house and my things such that it can’t get into things in the first place. If I keep the closet doors shut, it isn’t getting in. People are stupid, and similarly, we should design our infrastructure to account for that. It’s why speed bumps exist after all.