Well, a minor piece can be pinned in front of a queen. It would be legal to move the minor piece in that case, but you'd most likely lose the game if both sides' material were even before the move. Pinning is a tactic, not a rule.
How's the bike infrastructure? Do bikes have to share the road with cars? Are protected bike lanes ubiquitous, or do bikers have to worry about being run over by a distracted driver?
There's a lot of empirical evidence that people will chose bikes over cars if the infrastructure made it safe and convenient, even with terrible weather. Paris, Copenhagen, and Amsterdam come to mind, but there are many more examples.
This is the correct answer. There are a few pockets in the USA where this is the case like parts of the Boston and New York metro area, but you have be flexible with your definition of "affordable".
And that's the point. These places are less than affordable because there's a much higher demand of people who want to live in these kinds of areas than the supply of them. We should build more!
I think a lot of those illegal warehouse parties died with the DeBlasio administration. At least, that's when I stopped hearing about them so I am open to the possibility that I'm no longer plugged in to the right scene.
The DeBlasio administration was the first to add a "night mayor", and they made it easier to open legit venues in the same neighborhoods that used to host the illegal warehouse parties, like that triangle just west of Flushing avenue centered around the Morgan L train stop, where Elsewhere and The Brooklyn Mirage among a few other big, high priced venues are now.
In exchange for making it easier to open more venues and have more legal dance parties, they cracked down on the illegal parties pretty hard. This had the effect of pushing the prices up, changing the scene and crowd, and introducing more regulations. Before, you had to be a little more plugged in to know when and where the parties were because they were "underground" (but only a little). You could also reliably dance until 6 or 7am and buy all the alcohol you wanted whenever.
Now, these parties are way more mainstream so people who are less enthusiastic about dancing show up because it's something accessible to do, and everything must legally shut down at 4.
I remember being excited that things were going legit because I thought it would make the parties that I frequented better, but now with the benefit of hindsight over the past 8 or so years, I think it's had a negative impact on the scene, along with all the other issues related to the ubiquity of cell phones and the changing gen z tastes.
I still long fondly for Bushwick circa 2012, but it might just be more "Back in my day..." nostalgia.
I did a lot of partying around NYC (pre baby) where this rule is rare. There are usually close to 50% of the crowd taking selfies, putting the phone in the air to "record" the DJ, or generally scrolling through instagram instead of dancing. I thought this was the norm, but then I spent a summer in Berlin. There, people actually dance, and are there to appreciate the music. The vibe is so much more fun because everyone there is contributing to the energy by actually having a good time, instead of being preoccupied with showing people who are not with them that they are having a good time. I think nightlife in Berlin is so much better than NYC because of a combination of the cell phone rule along with the stricter door policies, and I hope those come to NYC by the time my kid gets old enough for me to be able to go out again.
I think you need to make insightful points for that. Having credentials is not a requirement for having insight, although they are sometimes correlated.
It would work like everything else. That "expensive" grocery store that continues to stock the high quality products that you love would still get your business even though they raise prices. In the meantime, the mediocre one would not, and they would be forced to lower prices accordingly.
I just want to know what the price of something is and make my own decisions about whether or not it's worth it. The social and mental gymnastics over tipping is just exhausting.
Interstellar Low Ways is one of my favorite Jazz albums of all time. Scratch that. It's one of my favorite _albums_ of all time. It's another one that won't scare you away if you're not used to listening to free jazz, and it's just epic from start to finish.
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is they use your "profile" from other companies like facebook and linkedin to decide whether or not you're worthy of joining. What other things will people who refuse to use these apps be rejected from if more companies adopt this screening strategy? Jobs? Schools? Grocery stores?
Public Transit > Cars for both individuals and society, if the infrastructure is there. Maybe we could devote more energy and resources on developing and improving that infrastructure before 2035 so that cars, electric or otherwise, are less necessary?
I found this Freadonomics episode [1] enlightening. A lot of restaurants have tried to have "no tipping" policies, but they usually revert after they lose business due to the higher prices.
Tipping also allows for price discrimination (a good thing in an economic sense). People who are well off tend to pay more, but people who can't pay as much can still be customers.
I find it really annoying too, but there are some reasons to keep it around. 30% is just crazy though.
> An end-user node is like a device, which verifies that bank notes are genuine or that gold coins are pure. If everyone can independently reject bad money and accept good money, the good money will have more demand and therefore be more valuable.
The key word there "independently". Proof of resources is one way to tell if an individual node is actually independent.
Proof of resources gives an individual who has more invested in the network more weight in deciding which "bank nodes are genuine". Those individual's votes in theory deserve more weight because proof of resources assumes those individuals are harder to influence (or bribe) and have a stronger incentive to keep the network functioning because they have more at stake. These systems are trying to ensure that the nodes that have the power to accept or reject "money" only accept "good money" and always reject "bad money", and they're using demonstration of resources as a proxy of trustworthiness and independence.
Whether someone ties a bunch of money into specialized ASIC chip that's really only good for mining bitcoin, or they tie a bunch of money into staking eth is an implementation detail.
I'd love to hear these recommendations. I know you thrive without a car in New York and Boston, but I would love to hear about other places like that in the US.
It's illegal for a taxi at NYC to reject a fare to any part of NYC. He might huff and puff if you're going out of his way, but he has to take you. You shouldn't have gotten out.