I use short responses only for people I work with regularly every day (direct team members).
For everyone else I throw in the fluff to keep things amicable. When I do that - sometimes I feel like I'm wasting time - but in the end I believe it protects you from people thinking you are a jerk - or worse introducing bias into decisions that might be made that could go against you or your team.
The child is a danger to other kids and should be expelled from the day care. If the day care isn't willing to do that you should find a new safer day care for your child.
--edit:
I just want to add that as was posted this behavior has been ongoing for over 1 year now, and the child is physically assaulting other children by hard biting (possibly breaking skin??), scratching and hitting "full force" another child on their head.
The severity and chronic nature of the bad behavior I think requires attention that this particular day care has not been able to provide. Additionally it is putting the other children continually at risk.
If these were adults, we wouldn't think twice about removing the individual. However since these are "just" preschoolers - is it somehow acceptable for kids to be subjected to these kinds of dangers? We rationalize that it's ok to send our children into such a stressful and potentially dangerous environment - and sometimes it is indeed "kids being kids" - but not in this case imo.
I respect and admire the compassion shown by some posts here to try to "fix" the child who is misbehaving. But the safety of the other children also has to be considered.
My son's daycare had a similar child who would bite and throw things when he didn't get his way. They tried to work with the child and the parents but after a while they expelled the child for the safety of the other children.
Transit systems absolutely need to compete against auto transport options.
But transit systems can potentially blow away ride sharing or autonomous autos if they are truly fast and convenient. If you build express tracks so that transit trains do not need to stop at every station and use truly fast train technology (+100mph) - there is no way autonomous autos could compete on long enough trips.
Of course this costs money - so build it where the density supports it. Plan your cities so that you build sufficient density.
Just to explore this further, the distance from 1 Market, San Francisco to Apple Campus, Cupertino - is about 44 miles.
Using a car, the commute time via Highway 101 leaving SF at 8AM is about 1 to 2 hours.
Using a train going 60mph should get you there in 44 minutes. During rush hours this beats driving and is about the same or slower than a car traveling at or above the speed limit (65mph).
With a train going 100mph that travel time goes down to 26 minutes
150mph (capable by Amtrak Acela in US) travel time: 17 minutes
200mph (capable by ICE in Germany, Shinkansen aka bullet train in Japan, TGV France, etc.) travel time: 13 minutes!
And there are faster travel times out there. What about hyperloop?
With a fast well designed transit system, autonomous autos and ride sharing can not compete on the full trip in terms of time. However ride sharing would be great getting people to/from stations.
Your statement is completely false in a dense urban area with lots of traffic and a well designed transit system (look at London, Berlin, New York, Amsterdam, etc.).
Even in a not so dense urban area - transit could potentially be better - but it has to be faster, easy to get to and frequent - competing with other modes of transport. But in this use case it can get expensive and potentially be unsustainable.
Tell you what. Next time the market is down over 20% I'll tweet how much my fundrise and realtymogul quarterly distributions have gone down. @baccredited
Curious if Triplebyte interviews for all of dev/ops/devops positions?
Is there a higher/lower success rate in ops/devops vs pure development?
For example vim is used extensively in ops/devops and emacs use there is quite rare. If there is a higher success rate in ops/devops and if vim is used more in ops/devops - could this influence the results shown?
For everyone else I throw in the fluff to keep things amicable. When I do that - sometimes I feel like I'm wasting time - but in the end I believe it protects you from people thinking you are a jerk - or worse introducing bias into decisions that might be made that could go against you or your team.