Embraer obviously isn't quite a Boeing or Airbus but their E-Jets seem like viable narrow-body jets. Now if the argument is that the USA isn't ok with all of the big jet manufacturers being foreign, then yeah, they have to bail Boeing out.
I'm not familiar with anti-gouging laws, but I'd be curious to see if Amazon's typical "we're the marketplace, not the seller" argument applies during declared emergencies or if they should be held responsible to reduce/eliminate price gouging on their platform.
They were going to get kicked out for spring break anyhow. Then again at the end of the semester. It's temporary housing.
I do empathize with the minority of folks for whom this represents a real challenge.
But having been enrolled at this particular university not all that long ago, my experience is that the vast majority of these young people are members of families that are fairly well-off - they were able to send their kids to a private university (with a reputation as a party school).
And the kids on the street generally look like entitled middle-class white kids causing a disturbance, which reminded me of my own days at the University of Dayton.
EDIT: Perhaps they're being pressured by the administration but the Twitter account for the student newspaper says it was not a protest, and that "students were treating it as a potential last party of the semester".
I'm not sure that this is why students are rioting, but the University of Dayton men's basketball team is currently experiencing unprecedented success (ranked third nationally), and the "March Madness" NCAA men's basketball tournament starts in a couple of weeks.
I wonder how much of this is truly about students having nowhere to go vs students being upset that they're going to miss out on a chance for wild partying.
I also wonder if the administration erred on the side of caution here as a means to avoid dealing with over-exuberant partying.
> If you're not trying to be snarky avoid stuff like "dalliance for tech bros lighting money on fire"
Haha, that's fair. To be clear, I believe remote work is generally more productive and represents the future of most knowledge work. I was trying to put words into the mouth of an imaginary conservative executive who is afraid to go the remote path there.
Not trying to be snarky, but because I think it'll be meaningful to executives: What's the largest profitable remote-only company?
Sure, your Gitlabs, Elastics, Sonatypes, etc, are remote-only, but they're still in VC-funded, money-losing, growth mode, AFAIK.
Are there profitable remote-only companies that a more conservative, maybe even non-tech company could look at to get a warm fuzzy rather than being able to dismiss remote-only as a dalliance for tech bros lighting money on fire?
Mongo reminds me of Tesla - early products were shoddy but had incredible hype.
"It's incredibly fast!"
"It's web scale!"
"It'll be able to drive itself cross country in a couple of months!"
And I think the unfounded/exaggerated hype bothered a lot of us, but like Tesla, the actual product seems to have improved quite a lot as they've had time and resources to throw at it. So sure, some of us remember Teslas and MongoDB from 2013 and scoff, but the current reality is much different.
It's already been established that hosting the Olympics in the current fashion is generally a money loser for the host city. All of those resources expended to build state-of-the-art facilities, housing, transportation, etc...with rosy ideas of how they might be repurposed after the Olympics....which generally don't come to fruition.
And that's when the Olympics actually occur, and the host city is able to gain some revenue from visitors coming and spending a considerable amount of money.
If Tokyo builds the required infrastructure and then no one comes, I've got to think future host cities will re-think this madness.
Personally I'd like to see a distributed Olympics, with mostly pre-existing facilities being used. Maybe swimming happens in Copenhagen, basketball in LA, beach volleyball in Phuket, etc. Maybe some events could be held in smaller countries or cities that had never been able to complete for a full Olympics before. A larger percentage of the world population would be local to some part of the Olympics, perhaps for once highlighting sameness rather than differences.
Or screw it, we could just let dumb governments keep throwing piles of money at this nonsense.
That's funny, I just had a bad experience with Microsoft. I applied for a job on their site that had several locations listed, one of which was of interest to me.
A recruiter sent me a bunch of questionnaires to fill out and then connected me with a Tech Lead for the initial phone interview. The Tech Lead introduced himself and the position, said the position was available in 2 locations (neither of which were my preferred location), and that was that.
I followed up with the recruiter and she expressed surprise, since she saw the same job posting I did.
A couple days later, Microsoft's site tells me I was not chosen for the job, no further information.
But of course, that's just one experience, and it's a large company, and all that. Maybe I'll apply for something else there.
I think the statistics to compare self-driving miles vs human driven miles are quite tough to judge.
Tesla was criticized quite a bit at one point for comparing deaths per Autopilot mile to deaths per all motor vehicle miles. This was a bad comparison because motor vehicles included motorcycles, as well as older, poorly-maintained cars, etc.
Then Tesla released a comparison between Autopilot miles in Teslas and human-driven miles in Teslas where Autopilot was eligible to be engaged. This felt like a much more fair comparison, but Teslas are lenient about where Autopilot can be engaged - just because the car will allow it doesn't mean many people would choose to do so in that location, so there might be some bias towards "easier" locations where Autopilot is actually engaged. There's also the potential issue of Autopilot disengaging, and then being in an accident shortly afterwards.
This is morbid, but I also wonder about the number of suicides by car that are included in the overall auto fatality statistics. If someone has decided to end their life, a car might be the most convenient way (and it might appear accidental after the fact). That would drive up the deaths-per-mile stat for human drivers, but makes it tougher for me to decide which is safer - Autopilot driving or me driving?
> Options add value, in luxury cars, a sunroof and alloy wheels are pretty much essential, not getting one means negative value on resale.
I've heard the opposite, that options don't retain their value as much as the core of the car itself. It probably depends on the timeframe though.
I bought a 2011 Volvo C30 brand-new, with absolutely zero options. It was the cheapest car Volvo made that year - manual transmission, no extra-cost paint, nothing. I sold it last year and, looking at price guides, those nice options would have gotten me maybe an extra $1-2k. So sure, I could have spent an extra $5-7k to get a nicely equipped model, but there is no way I would have gotten an extra $5k back when I sold the car.
I'd concede that if you trade cars in while they're still quite fresh there might be some truth to this. If you have a really oddly configured 2-year-old luxury car, maybe it'd be "lot poison" without leather and a sunroof.
Reading their FAQ it sounds like you get to take a quick test drive and do a visual inspection, no mention of being able to take the car to a mechanic for a thorough pre-purchase inspection. There is a 7-day Money Back Guarantee (that does not cover delivery costs), so you could take a car to a mechanic post-purchase and then potentially get a refund if you find something you don't like.
That might be a good 90% solution - car registrations are public records, which tons of companies harvest, which is why you get those annoying extended warranty junk mailers, etc.
Not all cars get registered though - some are chopped for parts (in which case that infotainment system might live on in another car), some are shipped internationally to be re-sold elsewhere, etc.
And there could be a lot of lag - some cars languish on dealer lots, get auctioned, languish on another lot, get auctioned again, etc. Or a dealer might like your car and slap dealer tags on it and keep it essentially as his personal vehicle for a while without registering it.
Lots of little opportunities for data to leak or remote functionality to be abused. There ought to be a complete, no-joke, absolutely reset everything in the car (and expire any remote access tokens) option in the car itself, that either a buyer or seller can easily invoke.
How would manufacturers know when cars change hands?
Sure, in the example in the article, it was a lease that was turned in to a Ford dealer. But I've sold cars by handing my keys and a title to an individual who handed me money. The manufacturer of the car was not involved in the transaction.