Most of these cases are just lower quality stell sheets stamped into shape by machines and then coated. The "work" is split between operating the machines and changing the manufacturing process for each part. The first set of workers are cheap but the second set of workers are more expensive. So, make a million of these and labor cost is low, build a couple thousand and labor cost is high.
When my water was out at home, it took longer overall to shower at work it seemed. Packing, unpacking, etc. Plus you have to shower when you get back home in the evening too.
I think a lot of the Darwin contestants assume that they can stop fast. They'll do this in residential areas assuming there's almost no traffic, so they may be likely to become complacent. I saw a coworker run a light with a 90 degree turn without slowing down; I was on the cross street with the green light and I slammed on the brakes and skidded assuming she couldn't turn tight enough to not hit me. She made it though, but never an apology or an oops or whatnot.
I went out walking last week after the sun went down, because there were too many meetings during daylight. No streetlights on the path so it was pretty dark. Saw someone dressed in black coming the other way which made me chuckle, and then I saw a cyclist with yellow lights on his backpack but zero lights up front who I also didn't see right away. I was baffled and wondered if he was actually going to get onto surface streets in the dark without having a light...
The militant cyclists are indeed in a vacuum. I used to have some come to me with a bike map showing how I can easily do the 15 mile ride despite not having been on a bike in decades. I also had some friends at work badger someone to join them on a weekend ride, and they went on a difficult route in the mountains that they thought was "easy" and the newcomer ended up breaking a shoulder. They seem to honestly think everyone can cycle at an advanced level or at high speed, and they won't accept that someone does not want to join their cult.
I couldn't, there are too many stop signs and lights if I went a more efficient route, and if I went the way my car goes it's too far for me (not in shape). I will be riding leisurely, I don't want to show up at work all sweaty and be out of breath for an hour. Also, it's friggin dangerous, the bike lanes are too tiny, or are shared with turn lanes, or there are cracks and potholes, etc.
What I see from cyclists is that they DON'T stop, not even at lights, as if the rules don't apply to them. Never mind if I have to slam on my brakes to avoid them. Sometimes they see the cross traffic and end up halfway into the intersection and then loop around back to the corner. It's like they're a bunch of self entitled asshats trying to rack up troll points. The rules of the road are for *everybody*, and I really wish the traffic cops would enforce that.
Also, the cyclists are going as fast as they can, they don't believe in leisurely riding their bikes.
Also, count the amount of time preparing to ride, getting into a lycra outfit that is too small, packing the work clothes, and the time after finishing the ride, showering at work, etc. That can be another 45 minutes.
Generally cities own the streetlights. They have to repair them over time so they would notice. Many cities are moving to add sensors and the like to save money, so someone would notice soon enough. So if there are cameras I suspect that there's an agreement about them.
Note that there are cameras on or near traffic lights even when not used to catch those who run the lights. Many are being used to count cars to estimate traffic patterns.
There's more to do also. Make sure vents on the outside of your home are covered with a screen mesh. Often sparks get blown along in the wind and get get inside the attic that way. This is how these big fires spread past fire breaks and into homes during the Sonoma fires.
Go back 25 or 50 years and the forests were most definitely clear cut. It is much more difficult and expensive to try and cut down every other tree. I'm from a logging area so I've seen it.
We also went for decades with no burns, and responded to fires by instantly trying to put them out. We now know that was a bad idea, but it's going to still take a long time to get back to a normal amount of underbrush and dead growth.
The extended drought has not helped the situation. Also some moth species have damaged and killed trees in huge swaths increasing the amount of dead wood to burn. Not even invasive species, they just grow out of control if natural predators are reduced in number.
Well, that's not a very fertile area. Not good for farming, not great for ranching, the early native Americans were more nomadic and scavenged for food. Acorns were a staple food for most native American groups throughout northern and central California. The population was low as well.
You'd need to show some evidence for this that is not from Infowars. The Sonoma fires from last year were likely due to faulty PG&E equipment. And for your racist mind to ponder, California belonged to Spain and then Mexico for a long time before the gringos showed up.
No, the amount of content being consumed is actually going down when people cut the cord. A lot of times cable subscribers watch stuff that they otherwise might not care about just because it's available as a part of the subscription and they're bored. Once the consumer decides that there's too much junk out there, that they only really need a few set of shows, and that they can save a TON of money by canceling cable, they quickly learn to watch less TV or learn to watch different shows.
The content owners still believe that the total amount of content will remain the same and that viewers will be willing to pay the same amount money per month as they did under the cable model. And that's where things are going to fall apart. Because some customers will realize that $10/mo for a crappy streaming service is a waste of money, and 10 crappy streaming services gets them back into the same awful mess that they had with cable. So if the kids are older and no longer screaming that they have to see Frozen people will dump it.
Back when people wanted ala-carte from cable, they really wanted "channels" and not individual shows or movies. So your "TBS" channel would include a wide variety of programming, movies from every major studio, and so forth. Ala-carte meant that you wanted TBS + BBC America + IFC, but no sports, no MSNBC, no home shopping, etc.
The content owners however don't want that model for streaming - they now want to be in the streaming business themselves and get a piece of the pie. They don't want to share their content with others because they think they can make more money that way. So the "streaming" idea of channels means getting something like TBS where all the movies you want to see have been yanked off and all you get are Turner original content plus Scoobie Doo; and if there were a SyFy channel is would only include the crappy SyFy made movies like Mansquito, but not Alien or Star Wars.
This is what is causing Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu to start creating their own content because they no longer have rights to as large a catalog as they used to. Five years ago with Netflix was awesome because you had access to so much stuff, but that was when the content owners didn't think there was much of a market in streaming.
Maybe in the future things will settle out, but with declining cable usage the content owners will have to come to the understanding that they will no longer be able to keep the same size piece of pie from the monthly cable bill. They may also learn that their own streaming service sucks and nobody likes it (look at the miserable piece of junk that CBS All-Access is).
It'll be a long time until that is sorted out. All of those programs are owned by big players who seem anxious to make their own streaming service while acquiring other content so that they can become the next Netflix. Ie, most movies that people bitch about not being on Netflix are owned by Starz; the Marvel superhero movies are all Disney now; etc. Nobody wants a generic service except for Netflix and Amazon and Hulu, but those are the same companies that the content owners want to take down.
An easy way to solve this is to just get used to the fact that you don't get everything. After a year or two it just seems normal that you don't get to see the same-day release of Walking Dead and have to wait a year, or that Doctor Who will never appear on a streaming service again, and so forth. In other words, live with the concept that there is no such thing as "must see TV". Right now if you can't get your fill of enough viewing options with Netflix + Amazon Video then you're being too picky.
Bay Area is just bad because of geography. Mountains and water means fewer freeways that everyone packs onto. And when you do have a good commute the jobs change and suddenly everyone wants to commute in a different pattern, or the roads designed for residential traffic are now handling heavier loads than intended. The mass transit is just badly designed because of political issue and because the commute patterns have changed since the mass transit was built. But many people put up with it for the sole reason that if you lose you job then you can find a similar one within a 20 mile radius.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of these cases are just lower quality stell sheets stamped into shape by machines and then coated. The "work" is split between operating the machines and changing the manufacturing process for each part. The first set of workers are cheap but the second set of workers are more expensive. So, make a million of these and labor cost is low, build a couple thousand and labor cost is high.
We don't even need hardware anymore since everything is in the cloud!
When my water was out at home, it took longer overall to shower at work it seemed. Packing, unpacking, etc. Plus you have to shower when you get back home in the evening too.
Also when I grew up, we were told to keep the bikes on the sidewalks and not get in the streets for that reason. This was before bike lanes.
I think a lot of the Darwin contestants assume that they can stop fast. They'll do this in residential areas assuming there's almost no traffic, so they may be likely to become complacent. I saw a coworker run a light with a 90 degree turn without slowing down; I was on the cross street with the green light and I slammed on the brakes and skidded assuming she couldn't turn tight enough to not hit me. She made it though, but never an apology or an oops or whatnot.
I went out walking last week after the sun went down, because there were too many meetings during daylight. No streetlights on the path so it was pretty dark. Saw someone dressed in black coming the other way which made me chuckle, and then I saw a cyclist with yellow lights on his backpack but zero lights up front who I also didn't see right away. I was baffled and wondered if he was actually going to get onto surface streets in the dark without having a light...
The cyclist has to get the bike inside, locked up, then shower and change.
The militant cyclists are indeed in a vacuum. I used to have some come to me with a bike map showing how I can easily do the 15 mile ride despite not having been on a bike in decades. I also had some friends at work badger someone to join them on a weekend ride, and they went on a difficult route in the mountains that they thought was "easy" and the newcomer ended up breaking a shoulder. They seem to honestly think everyone can cycle at an advanced level or at high speed, and they won't accept that someone does not want to join their cult.
I couldn't, there are too many stop signs and lights if I went a more efficient route, and if I went the way my car goes it's too far for me (not in shape). I will be riding leisurely, I don't want to show up at work all sweaty and be out of breath for an hour. Also, it's friggin dangerous, the bike lanes are too tiny, or are shared with turn lanes, or there are cracks and potholes, etc.
What I see from cyclists is that they DON'T stop, not even at lights, as if the rules don't apply to them. Never mind if I have to slam on my brakes to avoid them. Sometimes they see the cross traffic and end up halfway into the intersection and then loop around back to the corner. It's like they're a bunch of self entitled asshats trying to rack up troll points. The rules of the road are for *everybody*, and I really wish the traffic cops would enforce that.
Also, the cyclists are going as fast as they can, they don't believe in leisurely riding their bikes.
Also, count the amount of time preparing to ride, getting into a lycra outfit that is too small, packing the work clothes, and the time after finishing the ride, showering at work, etc. That can be another 45 minutes.
Apple doesn't really care about OSX or its Mac computers much anymore, they exist only as a life support system for iOS development.
the Macbook Pro (2015 or earlier) is a very nice laptop, better than almost all PC laptops.
Generally cities own the streetlights. They have to repair them over time so they would notice. Many cities are moving to add sensors and the like to save money, so someone would notice soon enough. So if there are cameras I suspect that there's an agreement about them.
Note that there are cameras on or near traffic lights even when not used to catch those who run the lights. Many are being used to count cars to estimate traffic patterns.
There's more to do also. Make sure vents on the outside of your home are covered with a screen mesh. Often sparks get blown along in the wind and get get inside the attic that way. This is how these big fires spread past fire breaks and into homes during the Sonoma fires.
Because there's so much smoke in Silicon Valley that no work is getting done...
Go back 25 or 50 years and the forests were most definitely clear cut. It is much more difficult and expensive to try and cut down every other tree. I'm from a logging area so I've seen it.
We also went for decades with no burns, and responded to fires by instantly trying to put them out. We now know that was a bad idea, but it's going to still take a long time to get back to a normal amount of underbrush and dead growth.
The extended drought has not helped the situation. Also some moth species have damaged and killed trees in huge swaths increasing the amount of dead wood to burn. Not even invasive species, they just grow out of control if natural predators are reduced in number.
Well, that's not a very fertile area. Not good for farming, not great for ranching, the early native Americans were more nomadic and scavenged for food. Acorns were a staple food for most native American groups throughout northern and central California. The population was low as well.
You'd need to show some evidence for this that is not from Infowars. The Sonoma fires from last year were likely due to faulty PG&E equipment. And for your racist mind to ponder, California belonged to Spain and then Mexico for a long time before the gringos showed up.
No, the amount of content being consumed is actually going down when people cut the cord. A lot of times cable subscribers watch stuff that they otherwise might not care about just because it's available as a part of the subscription and they're bored. Once the consumer decides that there's too much junk out there, that they only really need a few set of shows, and that they can save a TON of money by canceling cable, they quickly learn to watch less TV or learn to watch different shows.
The content owners still believe that the total amount of content will remain the same and that viewers will be willing to pay the same amount money per month as they did under the cable model. And that's where things are going to fall apart. Because some customers will realize that $10/mo for a crappy streaming service is a waste of money, and 10 crappy streaming services gets them back into the same awful mess that they had with cable. So if the kids are older and no longer screaming that they have to see Frozen people will dump it.
Back when people wanted ala-carte from cable, they really wanted "channels" and not individual shows or movies. So your "TBS" channel would include a wide variety of programming, movies from every major studio, and so forth. Ala-carte meant that you wanted TBS + BBC America + IFC, but no sports, no MSNBC, no home shopping, etc.
The content owners however don't want that model for streaming - they now want to be in the streaming business themselves and get a piece of the pie. They don't want to share their content with others because they think they can make more money that way. So the "streaming" idea of channels means getting something like TBS where all the movies you want to see have been yanked off and all you get are Turner original content plus Scoobie Doo; and if there were a SyFy channel is would only include the crappy SyFy made movies like Mansquito, but not Alien or Star Wars.
This is what is causing Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu to start creating their own content because they no longer have rights to as large a catalog as they used to. Five years ago with Netflix was awesome because you had access to so much stuff, but that was when the content owners didn't think there was much of a market in streaming.
Maybe in the future things will settle out, but with declining cable usage the content owners will have to come to the understanding that they will no longer be able to keep the same size piece of pie from the monthly cable bill. They may also learn that their own streaming service sucks and nobody likes it (look at the miserable piece of junk that CBS All-Access is).
It'll be a long time until that is sorted out. All of those programs are owned by big players who seem anxious to make their own streaming service while acquiring other content so that they can become the next Netflix. Ie, most movies that people bitch about not being on Netflix are owned by Starz; the Marvel superhero movies are all Disney now; etc. Nobody wants a generic service except for Netflix and Amazon and Hulu, but those are the same companies that the content owners want to take down.
An easy way to solve this is to just get used to the fact that you don't get everything. After a year or two it just seems normal that you don't get to see the same-day release of Walking Dead and have to wait a year, or that Doctor Who will never appear on a streaming service again, and so forth. In other words, live with the concept that there is no such thing as "must see TV". Right now if you can't get your fill of enough viewing options with Netflix + Amazon Video then you're being too picky.
They build new roads, they widen roads, etc. Which is why there's ALWAYS construction going on and that construction causes more traffic :-)
Bay Area is just bad because of geography. Mountains and water means fewer freeways that everyone packs onto. And when you do have a good commute the jobs change and suddenly everyone wants to commute in a different pattern, or the roads designed for residential traffic are now handling heavier loads than intended. The mass transit is just badly designed because of political issue and because the commute patterns have changed since the mass transit was built. But many people put up with it for the sole reason that if you lose you job then you can find a similar one within a 20 mile radius.
Also companies today come and go, in many fields you couldn't keep a job for life if you wanted to.