Even when you try to keep the implementation fairly practical just deciding that there should be a city somewhere without any historical logic for the presence of a city is a strategy with a pretty dubious success rate. Doesn't fail every time; but unless you get lucky and manage to find an attractive chunk of real estate that was missing nothing but critical mass; or you have a very specific purpose in mind like 'new administrative center without restive urban population' that allows you to just tell the civil service to live there unless they like 8 hour commutes and declare victory your odds aren't good.

In this case the Saudis started with that downer; picked a particularly grim environment, likely to get at least a couple of degrees grimmer in the comparatively near future, and treated aggressive deviations from practicality as a virtue. There's probably something they could have done to doom the plan harder; but I'm not sure offhand what it would have been.

>Do any of the Dems you named understand that money is not zero-sum and the Fed can create money faster than prices rise?

Which will cause rising prices, and they will have to create more money to compensate, which will create even more rising prices. You are calling for massive inflation.

Wikipedia officially requires articles to summarize their sources from a neutral point of view. However, Wikipedia did become overtly political with the PROTECT IP blackout of January 18, 2012, in protest of a proposed law seen to threaten Wikipedia's existence.

The first time you add a website to your home screen, it installs the website's service worker. You have to use the Internet for that, just as you have to use the Internet to download an application from Apple's App Store.

And I'm curious about what the blockers for even a partial PWA implementation have been during each of these 12 years.

All I've been asking is what features of Grab combined with missing features of PWA likely led to their continuing to choose native apps.

I don't see where I "assume[d] to know better than Grab".

How do you decide what the value of someone's work is?

The problem came up before the Russian revolution. The socialist revolutionaries thought yours was a great idea, but the best they could come up with for actually assigning value was "um, a committee of some kind maybe?"

The market answer is that competitive buyers will pay you what your work is worth. That obviously requires competitive buyers, and the absence of obstacles like, for example, health insurance benefits interfering with your ability to switch employers or go out on your own.

We also have 2022 and 2023 settlements of similar merchants vs. credit card companies lawsuits that haven't resulted in mass chaos.

I suppose they could take my "rejected" card for an additional fee. A great way to ensure I never go there again, but up to them I suppose.

Funny. American restaurants almost univesally expect an additional fee of 15-30% called a bri.. er, "tip" but you'll boycott one over the 2% they might pass on to you to use a reward card?

They just make insane profits because of the volume of product that they move.

Walmart's return on assets is ~7% which is not bad, but is certainly not insane. They'd do a lot better liquidating all their stock and stores and sticking the money in a NASDAQ index fund.

Microsoft's ROA is ~18% and Nvidia ~77%.

Walmart's net profit of $15 billion is a BIG NUMBER but only compared to something like an individual's net income. The median American household's ROA seems to be about 42%, although you could argue that should be a little lower if you properly accounted education as an asset.

1) You do know the M series chips offer the best performance per watt right now compared to Intel and AMD. 2) Saving costs means little if your hardware accomplishes zero goals. Grab develops iOS apps on these machines; what "real data platform" do you recommend to replace Macs?

I fully anticipate there will be branding changes, like adding a '+' for rewards and consumers will learn fairly quickly that merchants frequently don't want to deal with the more expensive 'plus' transactions.

Can't blame them, your rewards points/cash back is just being charged to the merchant.

Again my point is Windows does not always boot in seconds unlike what you asserted. I have worked in a few companies where they are probably still using the weakest CPUs off 5400 rpm HDDs. Booting anything on those machines will be slow. I am can imagine a company like a Bank of America being one of them.

Or you just carry a couple of cards, one with no rewards that people will actually take, and maybe one or two with rewards that some merchants will still take.

The biggest thing to get right is some simple 'branding' so consumers actually know at a glance what cards might work or might not.

It's just bonkers that the credit card companies have basically made the merchants pay for the credit card companies to motivate cardholders to use the cards that merchants don't want them using in the first place. Those 'cash back' and 'rewards' represent some of cost of goods that a consumer can't really get away from without these measures.

Barring pretty exciting advances in biotech(along with either the psychology or...less wholesome methods...of keeping people on-task when they learn that their 4-century lifespan will be dedicated to a period of drifting through nothing and a life sentence studying the surfaces of Kuiper belt objects inside a tiny habitube or something) you are going to hit a line where (human) exploration is not going to be readily separable from human colonization; just because shipping times become prohibitive: Anywhere on earth you can just pack some extra canned goods and a few spare parts and be there and back in under a decade even with age of sail era tech; even faster now unless the obstacle is political objections by people who already live there, in which case it's 'espionage' more than 'exploration'. Hasn't really been a notable case of 'exploration inextricably linked to colonization' since humans crossed the Bering straight into the Americas, with some weaker alternatives from the colonial period where it almost certainly wouldn't have been as cost-effective; but would have been theoretically feasible.

Near-earth objects are mostly in the same board. Shipping cost are higher, so presumably lunar mining overseers will receive less frequent breaks than offshore drill rig workers; but the moon is only 3-ish days away. As you move further away the numbers get less favorable; though they still remain within the realm of "there were people circumnavigating the earth in that time, even before we knew how scurvy worked" or at least "modest chunk of your expected working life"; and it may well be relevant that a lot of the more distant objects are either gas giants that you would only ever observe rather than land on, or very small solid bodies that you could potentially just have a robot slap an ion drive on and bring back for your perusal.

Ultimately, it seems like it boils down to an irrational emotional position. Some people, don't know why, just look at a situation and are all "the most fulfilling outcome possible would be making this the next generation's problem!" Leads to enough bad calls earthside; I assume there will be some particularly grim outcomes in more hostile environments.

It's right there in the summary, that merchant's would start being able to decline the credit cards with 'points' and 'cash back'. I presume this would come with some rebranding to be phased in, like 'Visa+' and 'Visa Business', with a lot of merchants refusing 'Visa+' just like they reject other high-fee cards.

Z-Wave v. Zigbee largely stemmed from some awkward licensing to implement Z-Wave.

I think the thing driving Matter-over-Thread seems to be a desire to have more commonality with IP stacks, notably Apple's Homekit not having the adoption Apple wanted and Apple deciding to maybe go with something that the device manufacturers will go for, but not wanting to have to have a totally different stack for dealing with Zigbee vs. wifi devices.

So here's Matter, based on IP, with endorsement of 'Thread' as one of the transports. Now talking to a Matter device over Wifi is pretty similar to talking to a Matter device over Thread, except Thread is not generally IP routing.

So Thread is an inherent mesh design, unlike Bluetooth or Wifi, and low power. Bluetooth kind of sucks for this application since it's peer to peer. Wifi somewhat better but it means you have to inject access points even if coverage could be had mesh-style, with a light switch serving as a perfectly viable relay while doing it's job otherwise. Also you have an actual shot of running a Thread radio on modest battery much longer than Wifi.