supporters of Israel's conduct love talking about anything except the thing that is happening right in front of our eyes: mass deprivation and slaughter of Gazan civilians. The reason that you want to talk about something else, like how many Jews live in Arab states, is because Israel's conduct is indefensible and we all know it, including you.
I hate wars, and I would love to see peaceful resolution. But we have a war already, most recently started by Hamas in October 7th. The sad reality is that civilian casualties are unavoidable in a war. Horrendous civilian casualties during American and British bombardment of Nazi Germany didn’t stop Allies during WW2. Israel conduct is nowhere near what Allies had done.
The point of Jew/Arab comparison is to contrast the consequences of two theoretical extremes: Israel victory and Gaza victory. Gaza victory would lead to extermination of Israeli Jews. Israel victory would lead to peace for Gaza’s Arabs.
CEOs will literally waste millions of dollars by losing half their staff rather than recognize a union.
Let's not pretend this is some smart stealth merit-based layoff play by the CEO: the people leaving are likely the ones with options, and many of them have been working remote for years now. They are unwilling to relocate their entire lives for Grindr. The RTO announcement came out soon after announcement of the union drive.
CEOs are responsible for the stock price. There’s no faster way to juice those numbers than by announcing thousands of layoffs at the drop of a hat. Unionization makes that a lot more tricky.
I think, as with any politically charged topic, journalists are going to have biases. I don't think there is any particular solution to this except being conscious of those biases, particularly as they relate to career advancement and money. Money explains nearly everything about the issues in the American media ecosystem for me, not cultural factors like "some journalists are more open about being on the left".
One writer that I followed nearly every day for the first 18 months of the pandemic was Derek Lowe at Science.org who runs a fantastic blog about drug discovery, and he has given his assessment of the origins debate a few times. The short answer is he doesn't know either unfortunately https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/origins-pandemic--...
ah I think even that is a bit pessimistic. I'm optimistic that we can figure out carbon sequestration and transition to renewables in the next few decades and prevent any catastrophic sea level rise. I fully admit that the global North will not give a shit if some peripheral nations are destroyed by climate change, but I think this summer is starting to show people living in Vegas and Phoenix that their days there are numbered if we don't do something. Maybe I'm being optimistic though.
yeah I think it's becoming clear that stopping emissions isn't enough and we will have to do carbon capture but Iceland has a functional carbon removal plant up and running and Exxon apparently sees it as part of their economic future. Lots of bad news out there and we need to accelerate the pace but optimism gives us energy for pushing the political front.
The Iceland plant will pull 4000 metric tons of CO2 / year, so my toilet-paper math says we're going to need at least 9 million more of these plants to achieve net zero.
Sorry for the misplaced optimism , if it makes you feel more bleak, building all those DAC facilities, transporting them and running them will require millions more of DAC facilities.
I just mean that it seems like actually a somewhat possible number for humans to build, though obviously it's more like infeasible than impossible. I pretty well realized how fucked humanity is around a decade ago, so it has been interesting to watch the realization spreading.
oh ya I'm saying we need to achieve net zero plus have carbon removal. We need to be net negative, we are already in catastrophe territory as far as much carbon is in the atmosphere (I am not a scientist to be clear).
To be clear, Net Zero requires massive direct-air carbon removal, i.e. the only way to achieve it 'net zero' is the permanent removal of billions and billions tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere and storing it somewhere.
one underdiscussed aspect of America's car oriented transportation system is that car accidents are a major reason that American life expectancy lags behind other developed countries[0] (along with gun violence). I have family that drive on highways in Texas daily and it's probably the most dangerous thing they do, but they have no choice. The cities are built to force you into owning a car and risking your life to accomplish basic tasks.
you're describing the exact chicken and egg problem that we need to take the first steps on with "people still need a car in Seattle". That's only true because Seattle forced buildings and roads to be car oriented for decades, reforms like this are meant to reverse that because the environmental costs are catastrophic.
People don't necessarily need cars in NYC, Chicago, DC, SF, etc because a majority of the housing in those places was built before car oriented zoning became the norm in basically every major city. We have to start rolling that back, it's insane policy.
Of the places you listed NYC is arguably the only one where people truly don't need cars because the public transit is just so good. I lived in Chicago for 9 years, pretty much everyone I knew had a car. Certainly true for anyone with a family. And that's probably the next best public transit in the US after NYC for a large metro.
The problem is you just can't build public transit infra like the NYC subways these days. The costs have become astronomical.
Shopify shares up 25% today, which explains most of what's happening here.
I agree with all the other comments criticizing the CEO's leadership of furiously hiring and now making massive cuts, but I think that is missing the context that the CEO does not answer to you or me, or to business professors, or to his employees. He answers to the board, which typically care about stock price and not much else. Today is a massive success in that regard.
obviously AI is moving quickly, but every mainstream news article about AI is incredibly gullible. Good time to be the Simpsons monorail salesman but for AI.
yeah they get paid a decent middle class salary. Can they afford a nice apartment in the West Village? No. Can they afford a nice 3BR/2BA in a decent neighborhood in Brooklyn/Queens/Bronx/Staten Island if their partner is also a civil servant like a teacher? I think so yes.
(not that teachers shouldn't get paid more, they should)
