I still do - good quality Datto Fairladys (as they were sold in my country) attract very good resale prices here. They're just so gorgeous, and they do fang it nicely.
Here's how to cure yourself of that. Buy a used one. Use it to commute down a very curvy mountain road every weekday. Start feeling like a real fast driver. One day while really stretching the envelope and sliding around corners, get passed by a 1972 Gremlin like you're standing still. Give up, sell the car and buy a pickup truck.
Similarly, my sister-in-law is a hospitalist, so I've come to consider it a commonly used and widely known term, but now that I think about it I don't believe I've ever heard anyone use the word except in conversations with my sister-in-law and brother.
It's not going to be good, but it's really just an accelerant for a denial of reality that's been building for a long time. I mean, there are corners of the Internet where people still vigorously deny that video of planes hitting the World Trade Center towers is real. (Or, more recently, that Charlie Kirk was actually shot.) I wonder if we'll soon see a "War of the Worlds" kind of panic touched off by very convincing AI-faked news reports and first-hand videos of [something], with a significant number of people so deep inside their insulated social media bubbles that they don't even see all the other people saying "hey, this is a bunch of crap that's not actually happening."
The paragraphs on all pages are formatted quite narrowly, displaying only 3 - 6 words per line.
If this bothers people, it can also be changed with Stylebot or the like, using a rule like this to change the max-width, which is set to 400px, to a larger value:
Exporting fossil fuels nets the government <$150 billion per year, while the federal government's debt is >$37 trillion (and growing by trillions per year). It's impossible to expand the sale of fossil fuels enough to make any kind of noticeable dent in the debt.
While 150 Billion isn’t going to solve our deficit issue it will help. By comparison that is almost 3 times the total $$ of military assistance we have provided to Ukraine since the invasion began.
most of that money wasn't cash assistance but the retail value of old military equipment we sent them as a write down, equipment that was already paid for by taxpayers.
The prisoner in the article is so unusual someone wrote an article about them and it made headlines on a tech forum.
The parent thread we're discussing is broadly about prisoner work in the US. So we should be considering the mean and median values, not the one guy making 4 orders of magnitude more than everyone else.
>prisoners being coerced to work is payment for their crimes. On the other hand, that job would have gone to someone else at market rates. This kind of thing drags down the market rates.
That's a different problem, for different inmates -- the inmates covered in this story are paid market rates. It mentions the software developer has a six-figure salary.
MIT, Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and I believe most or all of the other Ivies, all fund 100% of the demonstrated financial need of every student, and they do not consider the financial needs of applicants when making admission decisions.
No, not for international students. Stanford (I haven't checked others) is very explicit about having a limited number of scholarship for international students: https://financialaid.stanford.edu/undergrad/how/internationa.... Admissions for US applicants are indeed need-blind.
Higher education is a strange purchase that is engineered to extract the maximum amount of money (up to full-cost tuition, fees, etc.), based on financial records which you are forced to provide.
Any asset except for a residence is typically considered something that could be tendered to the university, and is accordingly deducted from financial need.
This means that external scholarships are limited as to how much they can reduce the expected parental or student contribution. Anything beyond this limit is deducted from need and pocketed by the university.
reply