Second - the output itself depends on management, so I'm not sure it would be fair to compare current production numbers to show the potential help to the population. In fact - Venezuela has more proven reserves per-capita than Norway, by an incredible margin:
The media might not be intentionally manipulating the stock so much as publishing information which short sellers find, package, and hand over for free. The incentive is there to create a misleading information campaign even without assuming the media is being very deliberate or coordinating.
Edit: I have no idea why I'm being so downvoted here. All I am saying is that short sellers have incentive to hand the media whatever they can to help their case (not so controversial, right?) and that the media might be taking it for free rather than, as the parent poster says, coordinating to specifically harm Tesla (is this the controversial bit?)
Others are suggesting practical reasons for having watch history enabled, but I would think that the vast majority have it enabled simply because that is the default.
I was also under that impression until the Cloudflare event happened. I do not actually know what their dependency was, but all shops were taken offline.
It's worth noting that there are a few open source email marketing platforms out there too. Sendy is $60 and obfuscates some of the source code.
Mautic and Mailtrain are two that I have tried. In my experience, both have some odd areas, but Mautic is a bit more flexible and has fewer significant bugs.
I've wondered if, in this context that we are in, it actually starts to make sense to both raise interest rates and simultaneously monetize government debt.
We want some inflation, but we also do not want a late-1980s-style Japanese asset price bubble.
I cannot find a real answer to this question anywhere - would this plan produce any negative effect? The plan would, as far as I can tell, help the long-term outlook of our currency and economy while incentivizing wealthy people to stay invested.
I might be missing something obvious. Maybe this would lead to businesses having a harder time employing because of the higher borrowing cost (but we are at full employment now), or maybe the effect is just too uncertain on the money supply. Either way, I really want to know the answer, so I'm asking it here.
To be clear, I am not suggesting that politicians have direct control over monetizing debt, but rather that the central bank deems this to be best for the economy in the long term.
I've been using Node Red for a few automation things too, basically as a self-hosted ifttt/zapier, and it's been working well. I would recommend it beyond home automation for the kinds of things that are "too small" to warrant their own code project and deployment setup but are still important enough to be automatic. This includes things like checking a webpage every 10 minutes and sending a text if it changes, or remapping webhooks between random services.
This is not totally true. It’s not 100% syntax. Elixir has one additional and widely used feature: macros.
In Elixir, as in Lisp, you can transform your code as a data structure into new code. This is importantly used in Ecto, the de-facto object data mapper in Elixir. It’s also used in Absinthe, a library from the posted link for making GraphQL APIs.
They get you to sign up, give your credit card, use their nameservers, and then if you get any serious traffic, they will conveniently be there to offer extra features with a paid plan. In my opinion, this is exceptional marketing.
The fairings currently cost a total of $6MM for each launch, or at least 10% of the physical rocket cost, so this could lead to significant savings for future launches.
The objections to DragenFly are not about what is best for the Chinese citizen.
This is not the concern in the signed letter. It is also not related to any of the core concerns from commenters here, as far as I can tell.
Yet somehow, many people are feeding the idea that the primary question is a cost-benefit analysis from the perspective of a person living in China. Of course, access to a pseudo-Google in China would be better for people there. It would be another option, and probably a tad closer to uncensored.
The concerns are simply not about that.
This is about setting a precedent of a company in a liberal democracy bending to the wishes of the government of a non-liberal-democracy.
The concern is that this compromise is not only something that happens in China, but also something that happens next in UK and then in Germany, and then in the US.
The concern is that any society with an "unfiltered" Google becomes a thing of the past. The concern is that the largest organization in the world controlling access to information begins "partnering" with governments and we step into an accelerated path towards disinformation.