Majority of the illusions seem to be 2D object projected as 3D object, they still get me every-time though. Definitely would recommend a game called Superliminal if this kind of stuff gets you.
> it's not very efficient to learn how to do something by enumerating all the ways you cannot do it
I think the better way to look at it would be to look at ways that it could've been done better. Everyone's a genius and mastermind that knows exactly why a certain product fails ("if they only had know this") or that the "bubble was there all along". Learning what could've been done better is much better than success stories where people knew what to do from some divine inspiration.
There are just so many websites on this page, all of which have their own art style and their own experiments. Honestly makes me feel very small on the internet but also happy that there are so many people who do this kinda stuff.
China is much more internationally connected and densely populated than Africa is. Pretty much why the rate of international infection skyrocketed after the disease got to Italy.
Africa also it's share of problems and diseases.See Ebola.
> Many of the parents with young children at home are dreading the loss of their office space right now
As someone without kids can you explain this? Where I work at many employees with kids come to work much later and leave much earlier since they have to pick up their kids or send them to after school activities. Wouldn't working from home better this process?
They are not talking about how they schedule and manage the family life. They are talking about desperately needing some time away from the family. Which is normal and healthy (depending on whether you discuss it and make time for yourself, or whether you escape trough alcohol and ridiculous amounts of time at work).
Also just being able to work without distraction. It's very hard to explain to young children that they cannot disturb their parents for several hours and many people won't have a spare room just to work.
The school shuffle starts at 4. For younger children, they often have a stay at home caregiver (stay at home spouse, family member, or in home nanny). It can be challenging to get work done with a two year old screaming around the house with no concept of boundaries.
For older children, if you aren't the designated pick up parent for the day, it can still be quite distracting with children coming and going and doing their thing without a lot of regard for others (as children are still developing that capacity).
Office can be a quiet refuge where you get to be around adults instead.
It can feel excruciatingly slow in the moment. I think a lot of parents forget about that when they look back with nostalgic fondness on early childhood.
"Daddy are you done work yet? When will you be done?"
closes the door
2 minutes pass
door opens...
It _is_ nice to be able to step away for 5 minutes and ask how their school day went when they get home and that sort of thing, but there are other times it can be pretty darn inconvenient, especially when they're under 5ish. And god help you if you don't have an office with a door :)
Probably depends on the person, the home, and the boundaries. I have a 2.5 yr old and 11 mo old and WFH w/ a dedicated but connected office. I personally love it. I don't find putting on the noise cancelling headphones, and the distractions are honestly lower than when I used to be in office. I like trading the commute for time w/ kids, despite missing the quiet time at times.
Also, there's a factor of where the people live. Someone who is a cab driver in Los Angeles might be making the same money as someone who is a mechanic in Nebraska. But the possibility of upwards mobility and higher education in Los Angeles is much higher than that of rural areas. Most immigrants move to large metropolitan areas than the countryside.
Well it worked for China, they now have large corporations of similar (enough) caliber to their Western counterparts creating a lot more jobs than if Amazon or Google were allowed to run free.
It's hard enough to compete against these established Tech Giants if they just come in and buy all the domestic companies. Not to mention the companies are starting with a massive head start.
What worked for China was acting a fool for a few decades. No rules, no regulations, nothing.
Like a boa constrictor, staying motionless, allowing its prey to feel completely relaxed, then slowly but surely, tighten its grip until it's too late for the prey to escape.
With its proximity to China, India could have had China's business.
Goodness, you can count on the weirdiest analogies on social media when it comes to china. But I guess it's par for the course in any trade war.
What china did was nothing special. It wasn't revolutionary. It was what every industrial power today did - from the US in the 1800s to germany and japan and the asian tigers like south korea and taiwan did. Protectionism + foreign investment + manufacturing.
The united states created the blueprint for success in the 1800s. All the smart nations have copied it and gotten successful.
One of the first things the US did was to place tariffs to protect local industry. And for 100 years, protectionism was how the US rose from a relatively insignificant nation to the largest economy in the world.
Without the tariffs and protectionism, the US industries would have been owned by britain, france, etc. Or maybe it was like a boa constrictor. I don't know.
US tarrifs were originally intended to hurt Britain, as the US had recently rebelled against them.
The tarrifs then increased during every war the US had with Britain.
It’s no surprise that the US talks of trade wars, due to the way its history of tarrif is entangled with warfare, and dislike of the nations a tarrif is aimed against,
It was quite literally a rallying point for Lincon and a reason for the civil war.
Southerners wanted free trade to export tobacco and cotton. Northerners wanted tariffs and protection for their industries (both to make their factories more competitive against European manufactures as to get cheaper raw materials from American farmers).
I doubt that they'd lower their investment. This is more like you're investing in the economy of Saudi Arabia as a whole, just using an oil company as it's vessel.
