So it sounds like you're cool with discrimination, as long as it's against the "right" group? Do you really feel that's equality?
Of course, maybe I'm assuming and you're cool with anyone making a safe space (not just certain groups). If that's the case, cool, you're not a hypocrite.
A big part of the problem is that some of these spaces are used to foster hate towards the "oppressors", or whatever group they feel is harming them (which runs the spectrum from regressives/SJWs to the KKK).
I guess I'm saying it's not as rosy of a picture as you're trying to paint what these spaces always are. See Evergreen College as an example.
You haven't provided any information on why this would be the case. You continually miss the entire point. I'll repeat it for you since you're having a very difficult time grasping it (it's not a terribly hard concept).
Amazon would make the switch since it saves money. If it costs Amazon less money, why would they charge more for it? If they do, they open things up for someone to do what they're already doing.
No, your concept is just moronic. I'll try one more time before I give up.
With a Prime membership, I don't pay any further shipping charges for two-day shipping. Zero. No dollars. Amazon will deliver the package to my door, whether I'm home or not (there is an argument that I'm paying for shipping by buying the Prime membership, but I guess it comes down to how much one uses it, but it's a flat rate, so really depends on the person).
You said:
Then you will be in the 1% of people who would rather pay $5 for shipping rather than walk 20 ft from the door to the curb and have no charge.
Amazon would make the switch as a cost-cutting strategy, so that it doesn't cost them as much to ship the package. So it's costs them less. But from where I quoted you, you threw out the $5 amount; $5 to [walk 20 feet from my door] rather than have it delivered to my door.
My point is that, with Prime, I pay $0 for shipping, to have it shipped to my door, and the package is left at the door.
Your point appears to be that, I can pay $5 more for driverless shipping, but I have to fetch the package from the vehicle.
Maybe this was just an off-the-cuff figure you threw out. Maybe you didn't fully communicate your idea. But when you put my point vs your point, your point doesn't seem like the better option.
Now, if the way I've summarized your point doesn't actually reflect your point, please, feel free to correct me.
Nice movement of the goalpost. My initial response is that this isn't as easy as you were making it out to be. Now you're accusing me of holding the idea of "nothing ever changes". So I'm not even going to respond to your first line.
I never said it was easy, just easiest (and most obvious) of all the options. All solutions are hard or everyone else would have done them already. Yes, I will accuse you again of the idea "nothing ever changes" because you can't seem to wrap your head around the concept that once much cheaper shipping options are available that will change how shipping is priced. Yet you continue to claim, "I like it just the way it is, so this will never work."
I think you're having problems with wrapping your head around why a customer would pay more for a more money for an inconvenient option, when the cost of that shipment is lower from the automation. You're making gigantic assumptions, so I don't think this conversation is really going anywhere. I'm telling you it's is not an easy answer. You're assuming that means that I think that means there are no and never will be any other options. You're having a really hard time with reading comprehension.
Amazon could make the change. But then someone could along and offer the traditional "shipping-and-deliver-to-your-door" for the same price that they offer it today.
Hardly. There is currently nobody who can beat Amazon on shipping costs. When they have a driverless mobile locker system that is significantly cheaper, who do you think will step in and be able to beat Amazon on price of goods and shipping costs? You're delusional, Amazon will eat their lunch.
I don't have to be home now for Amazon. With your system, I'd have to home. With the current system, I can just answer my door. With your system, there is more work involved with the customer. You have made no case for how yours is an easier solution for customer.
That's great if Amazon wants to lower shipping costs. But you haven't really made a case why that would involve paying Amazon extra money if they're already lowering the shipping cost.
How do you not understand this? There are two shipping options, one costs Amazon half what the other does. Do you really think that they will continue indefinitely to charge the customers the same for those two shipping options?
One more time. Why would I pay more for a shipping option that saves Amazon money and is more hassle for me?
I'm not really sure what your "locker" argument is. Amazon already delivers to my door. Why would I need a locker? You haven't explained how, with automated driving, the package gets from the vehicle to my door (or locker, since it really doesn't matter).
This just keeps going over your head. The locker is ON the vehicle. You walk to the vehicle. Unlock the locker. Retrieve the package. A huge number of people use Amazon lockers, many more will when those lockers are right outside their door. Especially because it will be much cheaper (or faster or safer or...) than the existing options.
Hey, thank you for finally explaining that! FYI, you never explained that the lockers would be on the vehicle. But even then, like I said above, I don't have to be home for Amazon to deliver a package today; your method would require I be home, as well as just put in more effort.
If it lowers the price for customers in some way, sure, I could see that catching on. But if it increases the price, I don't see how it would.
That doesn't make sense. You paid to check your luggage as part of your ticket...and then you pay an extra fee to check your luggage? Some airlines don't check any bags for free and you are charged. Do you want to show me an airline that double-dips like this (charges you to check luggage in the price of the ticket and then charges again)?
Nice movement of the goalpost. My initial response is that this isn't as easy as you were making it out to be. Now you're accusing me of holding the idea of "nothing ever changes". So I'm not even going to respond to your first line.
Amazon could make the change. But then someone could along and offer the traditional "shipping-and-deliver-to-your-door" for the same price that they offer it today. That's great if Amazon wants to lower shipping costs. But you haven't really made a case why that would involve paying Amazon extra money if they're already lowering the shipping cost.
I'm not really sure what your "locker" argument is. Amazon already delivers to my door. Why would I need a locker? You haven't explained how, with automated driving, the package gets from the vehicle to my door (or locker, since it really doesn't matter).
It doesn't help when those words can be used in wildly different contexts, and that the definition can vary from one person to another.
For example, I like progressives. I like the progressive platform. Policies based on science and logic, rather than tradition? Awesome! Certain social services (I like fire fighters, roads, and the post office)? Sign me up.
But then you have regressives. Those that, on the surface may seem progressive, but aren't (even if that's what they call themselves). Those that mainly focus on bigoted identity politics.
For some, a regressive is an SJW (basically, a radical "left" extremist that generally holds a multitude of double standards). To some, anyone on the left is an SJW.
I'm center-left. But by simply stating what I have, I could have names hurled at me such as "literally Hitler" (doubtful that I'd get SJW since I've criticized identity politics).
Why would I pay that? With Prime, I already pay no shipping. Why would I pay $5 more for a service I'm already getting? You're also vastly underestimating the convenience factor.
An Amazon locker? Why would I have one? Amazon already delivers to my doorstep.
Easiest...for Amazon. Not for the customer. I would not order from Amazon if they did this.
So I don't think it's as easy as you're trying to make it out to be.
Except they can also be used to play homebrew games, and honestly, the emulator itself is not illegal and it's not up to Microsoft to police that. By that logic, Windows would need to be restricted on what programs you can install, since a person might install pirated software.
Try and remember that the use of public spaces is for everyone, not just protesters. I fully believe in the right for people to protest, and to use public spaces for that protest. For areas like public roads, I see nothing wrong with getting some sort of parade permit (since roads are there to allow people to get around). A person's right to protest does not trump my right to the public road.
And if facebook makes him despise his "friends," that really says a lot about him and the "friendships" that he has.
While I'm not fan of Denton, he has a point. Not sure what his context is, but social media (not just FaceBook) seems to embolden people to express some truly awful things. I've seen more than a couple people that went from thoughtful and insightful posts to outright bigotry.
It doesn't strike me as good business to not have a presidential candidate/president-elect on your platform. But most people that are anti-SJW don't really have that kind of pull, so they're less of an issue.
Slashdot Mirror
You may want to get your eyes checked. Most people can tell the difference sitting more than 3 feet away.
I paid about $450 for my OnePlus 3T. Works really well, even has more RAM than these new Google phones. Though wish it worked on Google Fi...
So phone carriers should be responsible for all the content that passes over their wires?
As the one saying "go read journals", it's up to you to provide the actual evidence.
So it sounds like you're cool with discrimination, as long as it's against the "right" group? Do you really feel that's equality?
Of course, maybe I'm assuming and you're cool with anyone making a safe space (not just certain groups). If that's the case, cool, you're not a hypocrite.
A big part of the problem is that some of these spaces are used to foster hate towards the "oppressors", or whatever group they feel is harming them (which runs the spectrum from regressives/SJWs to the KKK).
I guess I'm saying it's not as rosy of a picture as you're trying to paint what these spaces always are. See Evergreen College as an example.
You haven't provided any information on why this would be the case. You continually miss the entire point. I'll repeat it for you since you're having a very difficult time grasping it (it's not a terribly hard concept).
Amazon would make the switch since it saves money. If it costs Amazon less money, why would they charge more for it? If they do, they open things up for someone to do what they're already doing.
Try again, moron.
Then don't write stupid shit like this in the future:
Then you will be in the 1% of people who would rather pay $5 for shipping rather than walk 20 ft from the door to the curb and have no charge.
Makes you look like an absolute moron.
No, your concept is just moronic. I'll try one more time before I give up.
With a Prime membership, I don't pay any further shipping charges for two-day shipping. Zero. No dollars. Amazon will deliver the package to my door, whether I'm home or not (there is an argument that I'm paying for shipping by buying the Prime membership, but I guess it comes down to how much one uses it, but it's a flat rate, so really depends on the person).
You said:
Then you will be in the 1% of people who would rather pay $5 for shipping rather than walk 20 ft from the door to the curb and have no charge.
Amazon would make the switch as a cost-cutting strategy, so that it doesn't cost them as much to ship the package. So it's costs them less. But from where I quoted you, you threw out the $5 amount; $5 to [walk 20 feet from my door] rather than have it delivered to my door.
My point is that, with Prime, I pay $0 for shipping, to have it shipped to my door, and the package is left at the door.
Your point appears to be that, I can pay $5 more for driverless shipping, but I have to fetch the package from the vehicle.
Maybe this was just an off-the-cuff figure you threw out. Maybe you didn't fully communicate your idea. But when you put my point vs your point, your point doesn't seem like the better option.
Now, if the way I've summarized your point doesn't actually reflect your point, please, feel free to correct me.
I'm keeping track just fine. Why do you say that?
No, you're just communicating poorly.
Nice movement of the goalpost. My initial response is that this isn't as easy as you were making it out to be. Now you're accusing me of holding the idea of "nothing ever changes". So I'm not even going to respond to your first line.
I never said it was easy, just easiest (and most obvious) of all the options. All solutions are hard or everyone else would have done them already. Yes, I will accuse you again of the idea "nothing ever changes" because you can't seem to wrap your head around the concept that once much cheaper shipping options are available that will change how shipping is priced. Yet you continue to claim, "I like it just the way it is, so this will never work."
I think you're having problems with wrapping your head around why a customer would pay more for a more money for an inconvenient option, when the cost of that shipment is lower from the automation. You're making gigantic assumptions, so I don't think this conversation is really going anywhere. I'm telling you it's is not an easy answer. You're assuming that means that I think that means there are no and never will be any other options. You're having a really hard time with reading comprehension.
Amazon could make the change. But then someone could along and offer the traditional "shipping-and-deliver-to-your-door" for the same price that they offer it today.
Hardly. There is currently nobody who can beat Amazon on shipping costs. When they have a driverless mobile locker system that is significantly cheaper, who do you think will step in and be able to beat Amazon on price of goods and shipping costs? You're delusional, Amazon will eat their lunch.
I don't have to be home now for Amazon. With your system, I'd have to home. With the current system, I can just answer my door. With your system, there is more work involved with the customer. You have made no case for how yours is an easier solution for customer.
That's great if Amazon wants to lower shipping costs. But you haven't really made a case why that would involve paying Amazon extra money if they're already lowering the shipping cost.
How do you not understand this? There are two shipping options, one costs Amazon half what the other does. Do you really think that they will continue indefinitely to charge the customers the same for those two shipping options?
One more time. Why would I pay more for a shipping option that saves Amazon money and is more hassle for me?
I'm not really sure what your "locker" argument is. Amazon already delivers to my door. Why would I need a locker? You haven't explained how, with automated driving, the package gets from the vehicle to my door (or locker, since it really doesn't matter).
This just keeps going over your head. The locker is ON the vehicle. You walk to the vehicle. Unlock the locker. Retrieve the package. A huge number of people use Amazon lockers, many more will when those lockers are right outside their door. Especially because it will be much cheaper (or faster or safer or ...) than the existing options.
Hey, thank you for finally explaining that! FYI, you never explained that the lockers would be on the vehicle. But even then, like I said above, I don't have to be home for Amazon to deliver a package today; your method would require I be home, as well as just put in more effort.
If it lowers the price for customers in some way, sure, I could see that catching on. But if it increases the price, I don't see how it would.
I'm talking about today, so what point are you trying to make?
That doesn't make sense. You paid to check your luggage as part of your ticket...and then you pay an extra fee to check your luggage? Some airlines don't check any bags for free and you are charged. Do you want to show me an airline that double-dips like this (charges you to check luggage in the price of the ticket and then charges again)?
Nice movement of the goalpost. My initial response is that this isn't as easy as you were making it out to be. Now you're accusing me of holding the idea of "nothing ever changes". So I'm not even going to respond to your first line.
Amazon could make the change. But then someone could along and offer the traditional "shipping-and-deliver-to-your-door" for the same price that they offer it today. That's great if Amazon wants to lower shipping costs. But you haven't really made a case why that would involve paying Amazon extra money if they're already lowering the shipping cost.
I'm not really sure what your "locker" argument is. Amazon already delivers to my door. Why would I need a locker? You haven't explained how, with automated driving, the package gets from the vehicle to my door (or locker, since it really doesn't matter).
It doesn't help when those words can be used in wildly different contexts, and that the definition can vary from one person to another.
For example, I like progressives. I like the progressive platform. Policies based on science and logic, rather than tradition? Awesome! Certain social services (I like fire fighters, roads, and the post office)? Sign me up.
But then you have regressives. Those that, on the surface may seem progressive, but aren't (even if that's what they call themselves). Those that mainly focus on bigoted identity politics.
For some, a regressive is an SJW (basically, a radical "left" extremist that generally holds a multitude of double standards). To some, anyone on the left is an SJW.
I'm center-left. But by simply stating what I have, I could have names hurled at me such as "literally Hitler" (doubtful that I'd get SJW since I've criticized identity politics).
Why would I pay that? With Prime, I already pay no shipping. Why would I pay $5 more for a service I'm already getting? You're also vastly underestimating the convenience factor.
An Amazon locker? Why would I have one? Amazon already delivers to my doorstep.
Easiest...for Amazon. Not for the customer. I would not order from Amazon if they did this. So I don't think it's as easy as you're trying to make it out to be.
Except they can also be used to play homebrew games, and honestly, the emulator itself is not illegal and it's not up to Microsoft to police that. By that logic, Windows would need to be restricted on what programs you can install, since a person might install pirated software.
Try and remember that the use of public spaces is for everyone, not just protesters. I fully believe in the right for people to protest, and to use public spaces for that protest. For areas like public roads, I see nothing wrong with getting some sort of parade permit (since roads are there to allow people to get around). A person's right to protest does not trump my right to the public road.
And if facebook makes him despise his "friends," that really says a lot about him and the "friendships" that he has.
While I'm not fan of Denton, he has a point. Not sure what his context is, but social media (not just FaceBook) seems to embolden people to express some truly awful things. I've seen more than a couple people that went from thoughtful and insightful posts to outright bigotry.
LOL, well, someone over there is trying, just not very successfully.
It doesn't strike me as good business to not have a presidential candidate/president-elect on your platform. But most people that are anti-SJW don't really have that kind of pull, so they're less of an issue.
"Get her!"?
I left Twitter, couldn't stand their double standards.
And yet, nothing you wrote refuted the comment.