I lived in a neighborhood that some would consider a bad neighborhood but actually it was pretty nice. Saw a drug raid across the street from me but never had any issues with theft, violence. There was a nice path behind the house that went to a local park. The only issues we had there were with the police ticketing us for parking cars on the lawn, when there was nowhere else to park them.

But taxes don’t take money out of the system. The government then spends that revenue in the budget.

I think there’s something in the text that says you have to be powerful enough to utilize it which is why it is somewhat tempting for characters like Gandalf. Even though it would also corrupt him.

I used to do this because it was supposedly better than sugary creamers. You’re supposed to use a little blender to whip it up though, then it actually tastes super good.

Those companies are just begging to be nationalized.

Progressive Web Apps, it’s just a website that masquerades as an app and can do most of the same things.

All you have to do is link a manifest file in your root HTML page and Android users will be prompted to “Install the app” when they visit the site.

You get an icon on the home screen, a full screen app view, and it can handle links like other apps. Your manifest can request permissions like location, etc.

I guess some companies will always want a Play Store presence, but it’s not really necessary for most apps.

Not sure why you’d even need an app in Play in 2025, PWA support on Android is great.

I wanted to play this at some point but the prices never really came down on Steam enough.

I agree. I’d like to see some separation between the car manufacturer and the software. Any computers in the car should support whatever operating system you want to put on it. Things like controlling the car’s functions would just be device drivers. If the car company also wants to get into the SaaS business, fine, but you shouldn’t be required to pay for that software to operate the vehicle.

I’m on board with it if people want to change the terminology around these things, but it seems like the core of what the author is discussing is the valuation of these companies and potential bubbles.

I think it makes sense that Disney and Amazon and Netflix who are able to make money through more of a SaaS-like model would have a higher valuation than a car company that has to produce a new car for every unit sold. Maybe there’s a recent example of an over-valued car company we can think of?

Consider that an auto mechanic and a software engineer can have a similar problem-solving skill set, and could both be very intelligent. Why then does an auto mechanic make so much less money? It’s partly because of the economies of scale involved with software. The owner of the software company can sell the software to thousands of clients without having to pay the software engineer to build the software thousands of times. The owner of the auto shop still has to pay the mechanic to perform every job every time and get paid for it.

So while I agree that Disney and Netflix maybe aren’t “Tech” companies, it seems to me the real problem the author is grappling with is whether they should be valued similar to tech companies. So I guess the question becomes, are “tech” companies highly valued because they are expected to make some huge technological leap that shakes up industries, or is it because of the economies of scale inherent in the SaaS-like business model?

This doesn’t change the fact that SaaS is lucrative because unlike producing hardware, you can add users/subscribers without paying to produce additional units.

I prefer to use the term fiscally responsible.

It’s fiscally irresponsible to cut taxes for the billionaires and corporations when we have record deficits.

It’s fiscally irresponsible to cut the IRS budget when that results in less revenue.

Republican voters have been brainwashed into thinking that Republicans are somehow more responsible with the economy and budget, when history shows that Republicans drive up the deficit with irresponsible tax cuts.

Yeah, similar to Tesla “full self driving”.

To me it’s clear that these tools are primarily useful as bullshit generators, and I expect them to hallucinate and be inaccurate. But the companies trying to capitalize on the “AI” bubble are saying that these tools can be useful and accurate. I imagine OpenAI is going to have to invoke the Fox News defense in this case, and claim that “no reasonable person would take this seriously”.

Seems like a number of Christians also worship Trump

Getting strong RE4 vibes

The Republicans will never reduce the debt because the only cuts that would make a difference are the ones that are the most popular with their voters. Couple that with tax cuts and the math just doesn’t work for deficit and debt reduction with a Republican government.

Are they going to cut Social Security? No, too many older voters that depend on that income. Medicare? Nope, same thing.

Will they cut the military? Of course not, they wouldn’t be able to virtue signal about how patriotic they are.

They’ll surely cut the education and IRS budgets, but the education cuts wouldn’t make a significant difference and the IRS cuts actually increase deficits because then the IRS can’t go after the rich.

The Democrats wouldn’t cut any of those things either, but if the Democrats increased taxes for top earners and top-earning corporations, and implemented a wealth tax, the increased revenue actually could reduce the deficit.

MA had a ballot initiative that would have gradually brought the minimum tipped wage in line with the state’s minimum wage over the next 5 years or something.

Restaurants posted signs at their door to vote NO and that 90 percent of tipped workers opposed the bill.

A bartender I know told me that I should vote no because if it passed then restaurants would have to reduce headcount and servers who were bad at their jobs would get paid just as well as servers that offer good service.

So it seems like the restaurants just threatened people with losing their jobs and so they voted NO and convinced others to do the same.

The measure didn’t pass.

My Subaru needed head gasket twice, transmission failed, and needed a catalytic converter, among other things that don’t even exist on an electric car. Maybe if ICE companies and dealerships didn’t screw people over so hard, I’d consider buying one again. I’m going to try something different this time.

Dealer lied to me to get the sale in multiple ways, saying that the head gasket issue was fixed (it was, but not for the car they were selling me) and told me that the transmission fluid was not supposed to ever be changed (it was, and not changing it is probably why the transmission failed). Bunch of scammer scumbags, my next car will NOT be purchased from a dealer. If their business model requires a state law forcing them into the middle of a transaction, they’re parasites.

I’d donate to Trump by buying a Tesla before I’d purchase a car from a dealership again.

All of this is great except the shoes, get some new/better shoes it’s worth it, your body will thank you later.