Eww.

Assuming non-wasteful delivery methods, I’d still call that a win as vaping is generally less harmful to the health of the user.

Quitting is of course preferable, but I support harm reduction policies in general

China does a variant of this where the whole country is on Beijing time. 99% Invisible did an episode that covered it here: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/matters-of-time/

Basically the local Uyghur population in Xinjiang code switch and maintain an unofficial local time which aligns more closely with the movement of the sun.

The U.S is different in that car insurance has to cover medical expenses for others when you are at fault, combined with the risk of driving quite frankly being higher in the U.S. With medical costs being extremely high in the U.S, prices follow that fact.

Car insurance is expensive because cars are both risky and highly destructive. Hence, making a market for them involves high prices.

Regardless of what you think of insurance companies, there’s just no way around this - you could nationalize car insurance and it would still either be really expensive, either on the policy level or else born by taxes.

I think the poster was making a joke based on this image (or similar ones):

Couldn’t you just start a recording on your regular video camera, do the training, stop the recording and then play it back?

I’m not sure this warrants a different application, to be honest.

This is a good idea, but the name kind of made me think of wanting to require the use of helmets for pedestrians.

For the record, lunch time is not considered paid time in Sweden either.

As I’ve understood it, the problem is primarily for the people having to manufacture products using it, and at rest it’s supposed to be inert.

lmfao what

I never hear my neighbors in my apartment. I’m also living close enough to bike or take transit everywhere I want to go, and spending less overall on housing thanks to being part of a very well run apartment cooperative. I also get to skip out on the major hassle of having to maintain everything in the building I own myself.

There’s even a gym in the building which costs a rounding error per year to be a part of.

Ain’t no glitch to go fast my man. Dudes not even going out of bounds

Colon any% no major glitches

Give it some time, you might just get there.

The randomness is basically a variable to be controlled for in the same manner that it has to be controlled in Slay the Spire.

Now B and C cannot be replaced for the purposes of testing the component in isolation, though. The hardcoded dependency just increased the testing complexity by a factor of B * C.

Consider the following: You have a class A that has a few dependencies it needs. The dependencies B and C never change, but D will generally be different for each time the class needs to be used. You also happen to be using dependency injection in this case. You could either:

• Inject the dependencies B and C for any call site where you need an instance of A and have a given D, or
• Create an AFactory, which depends on B and C, having a method create with a parameter D returning A, and then inject that for all call sites where you have a given D.

This is a stripped example, but one I personally have both seen and productively used frequently at work.

In this case the AFactory could practically be renamed PartialA and be functionally the same thing.

You could also imagine a factory that returns different implementations of a given interface based on either static (B and C in the previous example) or dynamic dependencies (D in the previous example).

I’ve realized that Factories are actually kind of fine, in particular when contexualized as being the equivalent of partials from the world of functionals.

That doesn’t really seem to be a particularly useful study. You could probably find the exact same thing by selecting for owners of very expensive bicycles, but you would be proving exactly the same thing (which is nothing at all).

A more reasonable approach would be to split into cohorts of different levels of wealth and then compare internally between those cohorts, to see the difference in emissions of an EV owner/transit rider/biker/ICE owner is.

My gut feeling says that we’d find them ranked on the following order, from lowest emissions to highest:

1. Biker
2. Transit rider
3. EV owner
4. ICE owner

It would be interesting to check whether that gut feeling holds in real life, and particularly how much the groups differ on a per-cohort basis.

Probably misspelled “contracting”