That's a lot of businesses. The local liquor store "injects themselves" between you and Budweiser when they sell you beer. It's not inherently evil or unethical to act as a middleman, especially when you provide additional value that the original business does not.
So what? Then the restaurant doesn't have to pay a fee.
If the problem is that the delivery services are charging high fees to restaurants, then terminating the relationship with the delivery service solves that problem. If the delivery service wants to make orders like a normal customer without any discounts, that's good for the restaurants.
24% of people choosing not to get a vaccine that doesn't even exist yet is significantly different from what was alleged in the parent comment, which was:
> People think that vaccines have killed more people than they help
A lot of people would choose not get a vaccine simply because they don't like needles, not because they think the vaccine is likely to kill them.
Haves and have notes is a divide that has existed for nearly the entirety of human history. It's not usually what people are referring to when they talk about the extent of the American divide currently. It's really more in reference to the fact that republicans and democrats rarely cross the aisle to support something that the other side is supporting. In this sense, the American divide has gotten wider because it's much rarer to find a republican and democrat willing to agree on something than it was in the past.
This makes your original complaint that they were ruining streets look even sillier. They've agreed to reverse all the damage they've done. I'm not sure how you're angry about this.
I don't even live in Europe and these policies have still caused significant harm to me. I can only imagine it's even worse for people accessing the web from Europe.
Restauranteurs opt-in to their relationship with Uber Eats. If they feel they aren't getting compensated fairly, they can opt-out.
It feels quite condescending that you think you need to protect restaurants from Uber when restaurants are already capable of dissociating from Uber. You're essentially saying restaurant owners are too dumb to know what's best for them, so you need to make decisions for them.
I'm not sure what the Uber/Lyft apps look like from the driver perspective currently, but they could theoretically be made to accept those parameters. For example, the app could show drivers a list of nearby requested rides (pickup and dropoff), have the drivers bid on each ride, and grant the ride to the driver who bids the lowest (or let the rider pick).
If ride-sharing apps switched to such a system would it then satisfy you to declare drivers contractors?
I'd expect Uber and Lyft could easily implement a system to do just that, but I'm not sure it would make the situation any better for riders or drivers. Riders would now have to wait longer to get a ride and drivers would have to be constantly typing bids into the app to try to win their next trip. It's not obvious to me that this would alter driver compensation in any meaningful way.
If they have so few options, why do you think it's a good idea to make it un-economical for them to work as taxi drivers?
Uber and Lyft are already massively unprofitable. If you require them to give drivers expensive benefits, they are either going to raise their rates or cut driver pay (probably a little of both). If they raise rates, fewer people are going to use their services, and they are going to have to cut drivers.
You're basically advocating for a fraction of their drivers to be put out of work so that Uber can give the remainder better benefits but a reduced income.
The patient presented with the exact symptoms of the virus, tested negative for other diseases that cause similar symptoms, and had two separate labs report the sample as positive for Covid. I'd say it's far more likely than not that this patient actually did have the virus. December 27th is not even a farfetched date to get the virus given that it was reportedly spreading in China in late November.
> Clearly they wanted the result as well.
Based on what? If anything, I'd say it's clear you don't want the result.
This is a ridiculous stance to take. If true, then open sourcing any form of software is morally corrupt since the government could then use it for evil.
Quite frankly, I don't think any reasonable person would consider selling software to the government to be morally corrupt unless they were reasonably confident the government would use it for evil. Right now, nobody has made a compelling-enough argument to make me believe the government will use this software for evil.
This assumes many employers will consider him a "man of moral" for doing this. I don't think that's cut and dry.
The business owners I know frequently complain about how difficult it is to fire underperforming employees. Trying to ensure they're legally protected from lawsuits requires keeping the inadequate employee on payroll for months in order to collect documentation that shows the employee is not fulfilling their contract. My guess is most business owners would be loathe to hire anybody with a history of making this process even more difficult for their employer.
Merely quitting would be one thing, but when you publicly excoriate your former employer like this (including allegations of racism and sexism without evidence), you become a massive liability to future employers. Quite frankly, I would never hire this man if I were a business owner. And the fact that the leadership of a left-leaning company like Amazon also seems to disagree with him makes me think I'm probably not alone.
I would guess the chance of finding any other summer work right now, let alone another technical internship, is below 50%. The way you handle this is to take the internship and be happy it didn't get cancelled entirely.
Agreed, somebody who is willing to commit a crime to advance their fringe political views is not somebody I want anywhere near my company. I can already imagine the headaches this guy will cause if he discovers the meat in the cafes was not farmed to his liking.
It's not degrading the Tesla brand though. Tesla is the second largest automaker in the world by market cap. Toyota, the only company larger than Tesla, was founded 65 years before Tesla. What Musk (and all Tesla employees) have built so far is nothing short of astounding. To imply he's leading them to ruin with his unfiltered twitter account could not be farther from the truth.