Hey. These hard working millionaires are tricking this money down by buying stocks and investing in real estate and then upping the price of rent to continue to increase their wealth so they can push to the next tier of millionaire".
Show me the affordable TV made in the last 5 years that doesn’t require a stand at least 90% as wide as the TV is
Don’t say it’s for stability, you could move the feet to be 1/3 of the way in and it’ll be exactly as stable because it isn’t tipping over sideways. Don’t say it’s for a sound bar, this is a TCL, that’s the cheapest “I’m looking for a new TV but make minimum wage” brand you can find
That’s a black Friday sale price. And in typical black Friday fashion it’s been advertised to make it look as appealing as possible, that TV doesn’t sell for 500 anywhere.
Either way, there’s a difference between a budget TV and an affordable TV. You can pick up a TV with a base for £300 pretty easily, and I’d definitely consider that affordable.
I call 370 an affordable TV, I searched the word tv and that was my 3rd result. If you wanted a good deal I would search for more than 15seconds, but that’s how long it took to find the first tv that matched the criteria.
Take a look at the 5th too, $400 for a 55in, plenty affordable!
Are you being sarcastic? $400 for 55in TV is high end… Lower cost 55in are, on average, $240. Affordable TV for most of the world would be under $200-$250
You might be blinded by your own country’s prices there mate, but even considering that, not many people are calling any $400 TV “high end”.
By all means have a look on UK amazon (or any UK store) for a new 55in screen for under £200 though…
A high end tv is over a grand, whether that’s from US Walmart or UK John Lewis. What “high end” TV can you show me advertised at $400? Lets keep it simple and just say any OLED 55in screen. Not particularly high end necessarily but I bet you can’t find a $400 one, in fact I doubt you’ll find one for 3figures.
I just checked Walmart US and not sure how you arrived at 240. The absolute cheapest 55in TV is 250. Where you get 240 average i have no idea, maybe a few TVs elsewhere but they’re at the absolute bottom rung for quality and we’re talking about affordable TVs , not budget ones.
Illinoisan here, Pennsylvania and Idaho need to get their heads checked. I wouldn’t consider anything west of Kansas or east of Ohio(being generous there) as Midwest. Also just about anything south of the Missouri Compromise Line is a southern state, the Midwest is not the home of traitors.
Then y’all need to get Ohio to stop giving northern Kentucky Skyline chili if you don’t want them to be somewhat midwestern and southern at the same time. But you damn right about Idaho, culturally they’re closer to Floridian that anything else
I’ve never given Ohio anything other than ridicule lol and Kentucky is southern so them influencing Ohio would be trying to make them southern but they’re bordering Canada so that doesn’t work.
I don’t think Ohio is mid west… I know(think) it had something to do with the original 13 colonies but at this point the naming conventions need to change definitions.
Pretty sure they're implying that the region west of the 13 colonies was called the Midwest, not that Ohio was considered the Midwest because it was one of the original colonies...
That leaves the majority of the country as the Midwest then and that doesn’t make a lot of sense. Really trying to make states fit into 3/4 designations doesn’t work, we need to split them into like 8 to make sense
So originally anything west of the Appalachian mountains was called the west. Then as they explored more of the land and gained territories the line that defined the west moved to the Mississippi, making the territories between the Appalchians and Mississippi the Midwest.
Now the regions are split based on census data, and there are huge swaths of land in the West and Midwest that are sparsely populated so they are larger regions in size.
It makes sense if you actually look into it and take a 5 minute google search to learn about it.
Sure, but designations from 200 years ago are irrelevant to a modern nation spanning a continent with colonies and military bases spanning the globe. To call everything west of the Appalachian mountains “the west” is nonsense now
Wait until you see the Confederate flags in PA. Ya know, where the battle of Gettysburg happened. Very much not a southern state. It’s wild seeing this shit in my neighborhood.
So much not a southern state that its bottom border is literally the Mason-Dixon line. Some people are, indeed, whack.
I have seen Confederate battle flags flying on trucks and houses in and around Gettysburg, no less. I get the impression that people are not doing this for historical reenactment purposes…
Seriously. I live in the Cleveland area of Ohio. We are geographically closer to Canada than the Mason Dixon. There’s still an abundance of hoople heads flying confederate flags.
It won’t “rise again” but the spirit of it absolutely has resurfaced in other forms, and will continue too so long as a significant number of people in this country identify with white supremacy and abject hatred.
The original KKK were effectively the remnants of the Confederate army + new recruits. And it’s continued to find new banners in the generations since.
I don’t think that’s anywhere close to universally true but even if it is that’s only one more example of why we should never listen to those kinds of people. That opinion is dumb, inaccurate, shallow, and more than a little white-washed.
This is similar to the line my neighbor tried to pull. He had one of those half-and-half flags that was the US flag on one side and Confederate battle flag on the other. Somebody came by in the dead of night and stole it. It became a big hoopla on the block. He tried to tell me, “It’s got nothing to do with racism. It’s just a rebel flag because we’re just rebels in general and ain’t nobody tell us what to do.”
So have an anarchy flag or fly the Jolly Roger or something instead. For fuck’s sake. I don’t know if he actually believes that line of shit, or if it’s just a cover. (He also has a Trump election sign, one of those corrugated plastic ones, stuck in his screen door. So I suspect the latter.)
Even worse are the ones I see flying in West Virginia – you know, the state that only exists because its inhabitants didn’t want to secede along with the rest of Virginia.
St. Louis is actually referred to (by its tourism board, at least) as “The Gateway to The West”. So, if it’s not mid west, I don’t know what they’re thinking.
To say nothing of Idaho… What bunch of fucking morons. The state is one away from the left coast and they’re calling themselves “mid” west? Are they actually that stupid? (Yes, rhetorical.)
I mean, if we went with what the word should indicate, Idaho is absolutely the Midwest. As it stands, there’s no Mid or Mideast, the real “Midwest” is actually just the middle of the country. At this point, "Midwest* has almost nothing to do with relative location, it’s more of a social and economic distinction, which Idaho does fit in with imo.
IIRC, the term was founded when “The West” was pretty much everything west of St. Louis, but it’s been decades since primary school, so I could be (and often am) mistaken.
That map for the Mason-Dixon Line is not correct. The original line was at that latitude but it ended at modern day West Virginia. It was the line of demarcation between Pennsylvania, Virginia, Delaware and Maryland. It was used in congressional debate during and after the the Missouri Compromise to refer to the line of division between slave states and free states which lead to an unofficial expansion. Since the 1820s it has been understood to move directly north from it's original endpoint until it hits the Ohio River then to follow the river west to the Mississippi River then to travel along the eastern, northern and western borders of Missouri. It ends on the 36°30' parallel and extends straight west through the Louisiana Purchase. The 36°30' line was applicable in the territories but not among the states. The Mason Dixon was the line of separation among the states.
it was settled by a lot of the same type of Germans who continued west from there during the mid 19th Century.. and its proximity to Cleveland has always sort of made it the easternmost Midwestern city..
Aside from the Browns/Steelers rivalry, I don’t get why there is so much animosity between people in the two cities. Having lived there for a couple of years after growing up in NEOhio, I miss Pittsburgh, and there’s a lot of commonality to be shared there.
Pennsylvania does seem to be really far east for anyone to legit think that they’re in the Midwest, but I haven’t had the pleasure of visiting, yet, and don’t know much about the people there. I can offer some perspective on a couple states that aren’t exactly Midwest states:
Eastern Colorado is geographically and culturaly indistinguishable from Kansas, so I can see how people living in that area could consider it being the Midwest.
Since Oklahoma, my home state, was mostly just Native American territories it wasn’t really part of either side of the civil war and so I think a lot of today’s population don’t want to be associated with the south and its history. I personally would hate to be called a southerner, but I don’t think midwesterner is necessarily the right fit either.
I thought it might be sensible on Linux to use MS Edge for Teams (the PWA version).
Nope, it's just as shit in Microsoft's own browser. There is apparently no saving it.
I tried the same thing and was flabbergasted at how badly optimized it is. It take ages to load in all three of the browsers I tried and it’s not even worth it since their feature set is 10 years behind the market!
My favourite example of this is how it handles audio devices. Every other app just uses the default Windows audio devices, maybe with an option to change it to something else if you want, but not Teams. It has to handle the choosing of the audio device itself. I once saw this lead to the fantastic situation where the sound in Windows was working fine via someone’s USB headset, but Teams decided it wanted to use the headphone jack built into their laptop dock as it’s audio device instead (no headphones were even plugged in). We manually changed it but it kept defaulting back to the headphone jack every time the dock was disconnected and reconnected! I can’t remember what fixed it in the end, probably just a reinstall or something but it was still a stupid and easily avoidable issue.
This problem also exists on the android app. When I put my ear buds in, teams somehow just refuses to switch to them. No other app has this problem, just teams.
Or if an otherwise popular community seems dead- maybe your instance just isn’t federating them right, or was never federated before you browsed to it.
I just uploaded a pic of my portable CD player from 1990 to a community for CD collectors. Nobody had uploaded in a couple months and the only person who had ever uploaded was the creator.
It proceeded to get quadruple the upvotes of the last post. People are there. You just have to share what you’ve got.
They may kill this iteration of ad blockers. But there will always be another and another. Google has a lot of smart people working for them. There are also a lot of smart people in the FOSS community that will eventually find a way around it.
At the end of the day there will still be people recording songs by holding two boom boxes together.
Make software that runs on your computer that uses machine learning to detect ads on you screen and put kitties and puppy pictures over them. Browser and sites couldn’t do shit about it unless they start acting like anticheats scanning your computer for that software etc…
Except safari of course (almost 20% market share).
Also, there are plenty of other browsers using Mozilla’s gecko engine. A quote from Wikipedia: “ Other web browsers using Gecko include GNU IceCat, Waterfox, K-Meleon, Lunascape, Portable Firefox, Conkeror, Classilla, TenFourFox.” (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecko_(software))
Yes, certainly, but all of these, if they want to sync their data, or use a own selfhosted server or have to use those of Mozilla with an account, giving with it datas to Alphabet (Google) and googleanalytics. Sync is essential if you use the browser in several PC, PC and Mobile or simply as backup if the PC fails or you buy a new one and don’t want to lose your bookmarks, passwords and other data. Forks are a lot out there, also very nice ones, but most of these lacks the basic infrastructure, depending on a lot of third party services. A browser isn’t only an app to surf the web, it’s a continuos work, maintance, servers and most important, a good and active community. How many forks offer all this? There are almost 100 different browsers out there and other 70 which had said Game over for us, from people which thought “Nice, its easy to fork this engine making it to my like and gain a lot of customers”, nice short dream with a product oversaturated in the market.
Firefox have the same problem with the WEI filter, they also have to insert in Firefox the Google Token, same as any other, if he want to enter a Web with this fucking filter, anyway Mozilla will do this in FF precisely because several Google devs in Mozilla which are working on FF (Bad decision of Mozilla to have Google as main sponsor). Ad/trackerblocker are not the problem in Vivaldi, it has inbuild the needed filters (even those to block Cookie advices and adblocker warnings) and until now it has gutt out every Google intent with FloC, IdleAPI and others to control the Chromium base (remember, also Chromium is FOSS and customizable,above with first class devs Vivaldi has), also don’t have and don’t depends on extern inversors, but this fucking WEI DRM of websites is a greater problem and need to be avoided by ALL browser companies which are not Google in common, if there is not a genius which invent something to fake this Google Token. We’ll see.
I mean, yeah, that's why I said it wouldn't work. Maybe if there was a website that was big enough that it would drive people to use non-WEI browsers if they couldn't access it, but any website big enough to do that would also want WEI for ad venue.
The only big website that could even come close to doing this (they won’t, and if they did it wouldn’t work, but they’re big enough that the attempt would at least be noticed) is Wikipedia.
A slightly more “productive” (sort of) avenue of approach would be another large corporation for whom Google is a competitor, and who themselves doesn’t rely (as much) on advertising, interfering with WEI for their own self-interested reasons. Apple is the most likely candidate here, although again, I don’t think that’s likely to happen.
Donate to orgs like the EFF, Mozilla, and the FSF. Lobby your congressperson, your senators, and Biden to make the FTC to start doing its goddamn job again and enforce antitrust law.
The only real solution to this creeping megalomaniacal monopolistic behavior is legislative.
I'm 110% on board with global warming, but this graph is misleading.
The author needs to at least correct for population changes (heat deaths per X residents). Even better would be to account for changing demographics, like age and county. From this random stats website, it looks like there has been a dramatic increase in proportion of older residents since 1970. Old people are more likely to die, so more elders = more deaths.
If I wasn't about to head to bed, I might try to fix it, but.... sleep.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure there has been an increase in small plane crashes in AZ. The hot air is much thinner than most pilots are used to, so they tend to forget accounting for changes in thrust and climb rates. I'm pretty sure a couple happened in just the last few weeks.
yeah, people lose so much credibility when they don't even control for simple easy things.
there will always be some confounding factors, but doing rate per population, is rarely hard - andneeded over decade comparisons.
demographic risk adjustment is more complex, so i'd not expect that. but if it is at least acknowledged, then the article is more credible and will get more (of my) attention.
media (and i guess their audience) seem to enjoy hype though . . .
oh shit this is the f.t. i used to think they were among the more credible journo's. pity.
Shouldn’t we be doing more about increasing heat related deaths, even if it would be primarily caused by more people becoming vulnerable to it, or more people living in the zone that is dangerous?
I agree. And shit like this makes me trust financial reporting in general. It's akin to not accounting for inflation in financial graphs.
And yes, the risk adjustment can be as complex as they want to make it, but when I clicked, I was expecting a study of some type. Probably my bias kicking in. My first thought was, "Are they kidding?" Then I saw it was from a news source and thought, "Oh, okay... no wait. Still, they know this is bad, right?"
And whenever you have a chart of historical data like this, you have to at least consider that an increase could be reflective of either improved diagnostic or record-keeping abilities.
More like you just died from old in 1970, versus acute heat stroke in 2023.
I say this being fully on board with the climate change. Charts like this serve little purpose when you don’t properly adjust for the myriad changes that have occured over the last half century. And before anyone says “you mean like global warming,” no, don’t account for that one, because that’s what we’re trying to see.
Yeah, it can be as simple as the death certificates requiring only a primary cause of death.
Old man collapses from a heart attack while trying to change a tire on a hot desert road? Cause of death: heart attack. If more details are requested, they could probably get away with just claiming age-related health issues. The guy is dead, no foul play, the case is closed.
Very much this, and especially over this period. More universal diagnostics, more emphasis on secondary causes and contributors, etc.
And it works the other way, too. Fewer people should die per capita based on faster EMS response times, better medicine, more urban living, etc.
The big one for me is age. I never really heard of people retiring to Arizona until the late 90s. It was always Florida before then. The over 50 crowd is 36% now vs 23% in 1970.
Hmm, but a big part of the problem here is that vulnerable places like Arizona are also those seeing such high population growth. I’m not sure correcting for that would make the graph “better”, it would just show something different.
I'm not advocating for better or worse. In the end, the data shows what it shows. I'm just saying that there was essentially no "analysis", making any interpretation inappropriate.
Hey, more people should survive, thanks to newer medical treatments and more concentration of populations around cities.
On the flip side, there's a larger portion of the population that's older and from out of state.
In between there's the chance that the threat of heat-related health problems should be much diminished due to widespread access to air conditioning. But, that also means more people haven't had first hand experience with heat exhaustion/stroke, and don't realize how quickly things can go from kinda bad to dead.
rates. I’m pretty sure a couple happened in just the last few weeks.
I’ve heard of articles saying that global warming is already leading to more air turbulence and that it is only going to get much stronger by the mid century
Yes. Hot air is thinner, so there's less lift on aircraft wings. There's actually a conversion they're supposed to use that basically says, 'At this temp, treat the plane as if it's actually at this other, much higher, altitude."
Here's one of the recent videos I've seen mentioning it (around 5 min in they mention the "density altitude"). I'm not a pilot and just find the stuff interesting.
As an analyst, this pissed me off. There’s like an oath to never fudge, misrepresent, or be selective with data to manipulate the viewer. We collect raw data for the purest source of fact. It is a single source of truth.
Just a quick Google on one of the glaringly obvious misrepresentations in this graph, and AZ’s population in 1970 was 1.77M; it is now 7.36M. Displaying this graph more truthfully would still highlight increased temperatures impacting increased rate of death to heat, but not at all dramatically, so the creator has misrepresented. Then there’s a lot more to factor in for proper analysis. Healthcare rate with growth? Infrastructure for the same? Why just Arizona?
Climate change science has fact and figure on its side. There is not need to misrepresent it like deniers do. Doing so dilutes and damages the cause by denying the one thing it has, truth.
Exactly. I stumbled across this report from the AZ Dept of Health which breaks it down into per 100k people and the data still supports the author's point. The report then goes on to divide up the population by age, residents vs visitors, county, etc.
Hell, the FT author could have just included a plot of the population growth, which was pretty linear. Not great, but better than nothing.
Here’s a version scaled by population (deaths per 100,000 residents). I’m no expert in this kind of thing, so I didn’t account for other factors, such as age groups. Also, the data I found using the source in the original graph only went up to 2021, and didn’t include 2017 for some reason.
Yeah, that looks more reasonable. The original graph makes it look like there have been ~5x the number of deaths in the last few years compared to ~10 years ago. Adjusted for population growth, it's ~2-3x.
That's still really concerning and makes the point the article was making, while being much more accurate and defensible when scrutinized. Thanks for that!
it kind of is, but its instinctual. you suddenly see your own childhood reflected from a new parental perspective, and you suddenly understand countless things you never did. you see yourself as part of a chain of parent/child stretching back a billion years… you see unspeakable purpose in protecting and nurturing and loving and raising this floppy lump of screaming snot into a future lovable thing. they look like you, with the most innocent eyes, and they can not quite hold up their own head.
Or… that’s the result of hormonal changes and the brain creating an excuse for the cognitive dissonance that results. It’s an evolutionary trait to further propagation of the species, nothing more. Your mind tricking you into liking something because you created it. The human mind creates fantasies all the damned time typo cope with situations.
In a different context. Your abuser isn’t that bad, they provide for you, give you a place to stay, and clearly care for you, just in their own way. Clearly they actually love you and you need to return those feelings to show your appreciation. The physical abuse is only a small punishment when you misbehave, you deserved it.
You seem to be under the impression that your opinion of a random meme and joke response comment on the internet is something we should care about. We don’t know each other, this isn’t Facebook, there’s no reason to fake being nice on a site like this. I’ll probably never see you again, your judgement of a random comment means very little to me. My original comment wasn’t meant as any more than a bullshit joke comment, but since you want to make it more…
I never compared babies to abusers. I compared Stockholm Syndrome to the evolutionary mental and hormonal responses parents have for their progeny. They’re both unconscious mental responses brought on by an external stimulus. An inconvenient comparison of course, but simple.
Back to the actual topic of the post… I don’t think anyone’s baby is cute, including yours, they’re all ugly bloated sacks of skin. And no the baby’s disproportionate features don’t actually look like either parent at that age. You want it to be true and your mind is giving you what you want.
Yeah… I see where you’re coming from, but… Just no. I’m a caregiver for my mother, and it’s very similar to what others are talking about. Being responsible for someone you love can be a wonderful thing. If you don’t want kids, don’t have them, if you’re not close to your parents, don’t agree to be their caregiver. But that sort of familial love, knowing that you are doing what you can to make life as good as possible for another human is an amazing feeling, even when it’s frustrating. Even if there are massive hormonal changes in parents when they have kids, which there are, it doesn’t negate anything about the love they feel for their children. Babies are not manipulating you. Hormones help us form those bonds, but the bonds are real nonetheless.
I have (had- grew up) 3. They are cute - its a natural defense mechanism so we don’t throw them in the bin when they are up at 3am for the 22nd night in a row.
Honestly, I didn’t even like mine, to begin with. But they grew on me. The hormones had me tolerating all the craziness that small creature put me through.
Love 'em to bits now that they’ve grown past that stage!
You absolutely don’t have to! Parenthood is not always an instant connection. I loved my child, sure, but they were more like a needy roommate to start off. I developed the bond as we went. It eventually clicked after some months.
And remember: you always love your child– but it’s okay to have times where you just sometimes don’t like them. Especially good to remember during the toddler stage!
Genetical in the sense that you are programmed to behave like that, not in the sense it has to be yours to prompt said response. Paternity fraud is no joke.
you don’t find its plan, revealed here, to cut you in half and attach your legs, at the hips, to another pair of legs (instead of an upper body) disturbing?
Yes, and it’s a great use of AI. Ai is great for this sort of surreal shit, whether for Humor purposes or just to be wowed. This is a much better lane for Ai.
lemmy.world
Top