Yep it’ll be the classic thing of the company saves money, doesn’t pass it on to the consumers, and now reports higher profits to make it’s stock price go up.

Yeah and the only way technology like this might ever get there is with companies like Google and others gathering even more data from you. Which for most people might not be a problem but I’m guessing for people on here you’d probably not like that.

We don’t have enough labor organization in the US for a general strike to really happen. Especially considering a large amount of union members vote Republican and for Trump as well.

I think the fact they’re going for a patent suit says they probably think they don’t have enough of an argument for a copyright suit which kind of makes sense. Just because the designs are similar doesn’t mean it’s copyright infringement.

I think the difference now a days compared to back then is rich and powerful people (plantation owners) wanted the war to maintain their wealth and power. Right now I don’t think really any powerful companies actually want a civil war. They’re happy to fan the flames and play both sides to get the attention off of them and the insane power and wealth they have but I think they all know a civil war would be bad for profits. So because of this I doubt it would ever fully become a civil war, closest it would be is violent protests or things like January 6th which would be put down by the states or federal government before it got far enough to become something like a civil war.

Also from Oregon and unless I’m mistaken we’re one of the better states at atleast trying to be more renewable about it. I thought I remember learning as a kid we had laws about having to plant multiple trees for every tree you chop down. Not sure if those are still around or how strong they are but I feel like we at least treat the environment better than a lot of other states.

I feel like this is just the next level of what Reagan did to cripple the government. You make it so they can’t do their job effectively then use the fact that it’s not efficient anymore as the reason to get rid of it all.

My problem with it is the whole purpose of what the device does based on the post is stupid. It just puts a notification on the screen as a way to try and use social pressure to get people to stop vaping. But that doesn’t work cause no one really cares if you vape or not. Some people might even think it’s cool or might turn it into a game of trying to vape without setting it off to impress their other friends who vape. I graduated highschool in 2019 and people definitely vaped and the only people they really cared about hiding it from were the teachers, no other students cared at all. So because of all of that this kind of device is just a waste of money that could be better spent on educating kids on how vaping is bad, just like what we did for cigarettes that worked so well.

Pretty sure it’s cause they did it without the original people (or person, not sure how many) who did the code. And so what ends up happening is the new people come in, don’t understand why things were made the way they were, and try to rework stuff to be better. Whether it actually is needed or not is a different question but either way reworking large parts of your code is bound to lead to bugs and problems.

Even if that’s broadly popular among people who vote in elections. (Which I doubt but lets assume it is). It would be a lot better strategy to push for things that are a bit more radical and actually help people. That’s how you go after the biggest block of disaffected voters who stopped voting or have never voted cause both parties don’t do anything to really help the people.

VP candidates can appear as progressive as they want because at the end of the day they don’t really have that much power. I won’t believe any real shift is happening towards progressives till we get a presidential candidate talking about more progressive policies. Until then it’s mostly them trying to pay lip service to progressive policies while chasing the moderate as the Republicans continue to drag the country to the right. If the Democrats really wanted to get more votes they would stop chasing moderates and try to activate disaffected voters who don’t care about voting because from their perspective both parties don’t really care about helping them. But then that would get in the way of the donors wants or stop politicians from being able to make lots of money from trading stocks and they would rather lose than give up that.

Judging by her speech as the DNC I doubt she’s gonna do anything progressive outside of the price controls she mentioned. All the talk about the border and making sure America has the most lethal military and countering Iran took all my enthusiasm for Harris away.

That’s a good idea. I usually look to see who the Oregon Progressive Party endorses but unions would probably be good to look at too.

I mean I think among the majority of people she came out of the convention strong. But yeah as a progressive her speech definitely deflated me, still gonna vote but disappointed overall.

Definitely agree with this. As someone from Oregon where my vote doesn’t really matter on the national elections I make sure to vote still to influence local elections. Only problem with those is that finding info on the candidates can be hard or sometimes there is only one candidate for a position.

This isn’t true for all streamers, just those with partner contracts from Twitch. They are the ones that are required to run ads a certain amount, I think below that they have the option to run ads but aren’t required to but also if you don’t run any ads Twitch will just start putting in ads on its own. And theres no control from the streamers over ads that show when joining a stream, those are always there and in my opinion are more annoying cause it makes it more annoying to switch between streams.

When I see stuff like this all I can think is how crazy it is we’ll look at “third world nations” and call them corrupt when we have stuff like this going on. This is just bribery but under a different name and with rules to only let the wealthy do it.

I mean I will admit I don’t know a lot about European public transit and it is quite a broad region. I mostly have looked at Amsterdam as that’s the big example people use so when I say America won’t reach that level I’m more referring to how nice it is there. I have visited the UK once and I have step family there and the public transit/trains were nice there to actually have them as options compared to America which often times just doesn’t. When I visited I only visited Newcastle and London so again don’t have a ton of knowledge but in general seemed nice. But from my experience not owning a car in America travel within cities is already starting to get pretty good where I’ve lived and I just wish more cities would invest in it and create high speed rail lines between cities for longer trips.

I mean one example in the US I can look to is a city I lived in for a bit, Seattle. They have been actively expanding their public transit and even when I lived there I didn’t use a car to get around and honestly the only problems I had was trips taking a bit longer sometimes and busses running not on time both of which are problems that can be fixed and with the expansions are actively being fixed. If you want an end game for what public transit can look like Europe is a great example. While I don’t think America can ever quite reach that level I think we could definitely reach a point where cars are still required but only for people living further out in the country. Heck if you want a good example for public transit in a larger country the high speed rail China has been building is pretty impressive. Don’t know the most about it but I’ve heard fairly good things about it (of course ignoring the other problems with China, but that isn’t related to public transit). Overall public transit does work and works well especially in the cities that actively invest in it like Seattle and Portland (both of which I’ve lived in/near). The problem in America with adoption just comes from a very car centric attitude which at least in the cities I mentioned before has been slowly getting better as people start to realize that public transit benefits everyone, including drivers. Just because we have to fight to show that it benefits everyone and that building bigger roads doesn’t help doesn’t mean we should just surrender to car infrastructure because it’s hard and takes a long time to push for public transit investments.

Except that is how capitalism works time and time again. Companies will lower prices to gain market share then once they have a large control of the market will happily raise prices and keep any gains in productivity for themselves. The only reason Uber is trying to undercut people right now is because the industry is new and they want to try and capture the market for themselves. Once they do or some situation forms like what we have with internet with Comcast and other providers avoiding competing you can expect prices to not ever be lowered again. If anything this is another reason why I favor public transit over self driving cars because public transit investment is owned by the government and therefore the people, it’s not gonna try and milk people for profit. Whereas these ride share companies already have shown they’re willing to act shitty towards their drivers to drive up their own profits, I imagine these companies would continue to find ways to milk more profit out of the service with self driving cars and with drivers being gone that’s gonna come at the expense of the users.