I guess. I don’t even see how this helps anti-union assholes much. Are they thinking out of sight out of mind is going to work when there’s no new TV this fall?
I can only speculate. My own observations tell me it’s much easier for 1000 of the richest oligarchs to conspire together and show class solidarity than 200 million working class individuals. It’s especially effective when those oligarchs control the media that feeds the masses.
Microsoft, Google, Apple, and many large Silicon Valley firms were all caught colluding to keep wages suppressed by agreeing to not poach talent from each other. Why couldn’t other oligarchs collude during industry meetings.
Nothing, because it’s not what happened. They blocked qanon conspiracies and caught this by mistake.
I had the same thing happen when I was searching for “oxy carpet cleaner refills” and came up with no results because of anti-drug searching. I suppose this means they have a conspiracy against cheaper alternatives to carpet cleaners?
C-suite execs: Hey Mr AI Bot, read over the company finances and tell me where we can get a better profit margin!
AI: eliminate your jobs. You don’t do much, you consume an absurd portion of the company profits, and everything you actually do, I am fully capable of doing better.
Assuming that the current covid wave doesn't turn into a full-on surge, my plan is:
Get rsv vaccine this week. It's good for over a year so there's no worry about it fading at an inconvenient time, and it gets the shot out of the way. Plus there's some research indicating that spacing adult vaccines apart very slightly improves their efficacy.
Get covid vaccine sometime in the last ten days of October (assuming no covid surge in the meantime). The mRNA vaccines seem to be most efficient during the first four months, so a late October shot gives me full protection for all the winter holidays, as well as the main heating season (Nov-Feb, inclusive).
Get flu vaccine first week of November. Flu vaccines seem to be most effective for three months, so that gives me the most protection from Thanksgiving through Valentine's Day, plus the little boost from spacing out the shots.
I'm going with GSK's Arexvy for RSV (seems a bit more effective than the other two options), Moderna for covid (slightly stronger than Pfizer), and Sanofi's FluBlok for the flu (again, it's the strongest vaccine available for my age group).
Edit: my scheduling is based on my own vaccine and health history, and local virus circulation. If your area is having a surge, if you're under-vaccinated, if you have medical issues, you should consider your own situation to figure out your own schedule.
I don’t know why you are being downvoted. The research that made these vaccines came from public funding but they’re gonna sell it back to us at $100 a pop.
It’s fucking criminal and should be treated as such. Fucking highway robbery.
Pfizer’s often‐repeated statement that it invested ~ $2 billion and did not receive any government research funding to develop its vaccine paints an incomplete picture, because its partner BioNTech received $445 million in funding from the German government to assist with COVID‐19 vaccine development. BioNTech is now licensing the NIH’s patented pre‐fusion spike protein technology.
Sounds like some of the money they “invested” was spent on licensing a publicly funded patent.
Sorry, USA-centrism again. [Are Germans getting charged $100 for their covid vaccines this year? Because I was responding to the OP comment of "they’re gonna sell it back to us at $100 a pop".]. Anyway, to clarify: Pfizer did not accept any US government money for their covid vaccine research.
To save time for the next step of this disagreement, you're going to say that Pfizer did accept US government money during the covid vaccine research period, and I'm going to point out that was part of a pre-purchase agreement where the US would buy up to 100 million doses of the vaccine was approved. sigh Are we done here?
So, a lot of states have been changing the design truck from the federal standard to something heavier based on the traffic they are seeing. So, if the federal government is going to accept the heavier trucks, they are going to have to accept the affect these trucks have on the nation’s highways.
Or just do what railroads did and design roads for the heaviest train of trucks full time forever, but that is kind of expensive and the federal government doesn’t want to spend the money if they don’t have to.
Not just highways. Most of these are still going to travel on some locally maintained roads for at least some distance to drop off their goods. They should weigh less than 2 trucks, but will also potentially pack more weight into less space than 2 trucks (depending on loads).
What will this mean for red light durations and the yellow change phase? It takes a lot to slow these babies down.
There may need to be a re-evaluation of stopping distances, but as strong distances haven’t really been updated over time, I don’t see that being a major issue.
I don’t think it means anything different for traffic signals. The biggest trucks mostly stick to highways, even small state highways, that don’t have many signals. And where they do, they’re probably going up be going slow enough already that it’s not going to make a difference.
A good manager is like the coxswain of a row boat. Their job isn’t to provide more power, or tell the rowers how to row. Their job is to keep all the rowers synchronized, and pulling in the same direction.
A good manager does a similar thing. They keep the team both aligned with each other, and pointed in the required business direction. There are a LOT of bad managers out there, however.
Depending on the business situation, that would be a complete disaster. You don’t want 10 people working on a 5 man job, when 2 more jobs are both languishing, and time critical. A good manager can make the calls about which work can wait, and which needs to take priority, and how to balance things. They can also work as primary points of contact between different teams and companies. This keeps information flow clear and stops people being left out of the loop.
While all of these can be done without a manager, the efficiency plummets as the number of people grow. By the time you’re dealing with large, inter-company politics, a manager is critical to take load off the workers. I don’t want to spend 80% of my time keeping people informed, when I can spend 2% and get on with my actual job.
Lmao this is not how human beings function. The smarter and more skilled your employees are, the more they will conceptualize their own direction from the limited information available to them. Keeping 5, 10, 40+ highly competent people pulling in the same direction is very challenging.
Good teams need good managers the way professional athletes need coaches.
I know the two replies are jokes so far, but this is really important news for people who live in this area, such as myself. This is the second bear attack this season in the general area that I’m aware of, though I can’t remember if the first one was a black or grizzly. Hopefully the circumstances of the attack are known; and hopefully it’s explainable. Otherwise it’s unlikely they can capture the bear and remove it, and we’ll have another dangerous bear in the area, which poses a major risk for outdoor enthusiasts.
This is simply Congress’ solution to a truck driver shortage … allow longer, heavier trailers that will create more toxic CO2 levels and disaster-level gridlocks in major cities.
Congress really aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed.
I say we go all the way and use even smaller numbers of extremely large trucks, and put them on specialized roads made out of two metal rails. I bet the efficiency of these “rail roads” would be far far superior!
Yeah, they are pretty heavily used for anything that needs to go hub to hub on a ‘when it gets there’ schedule. However, I find it ironic that the majority of pro-train individuals complain heavily about cargo trains making the train system worse.
It’s not the cargo trains that make the system worse, it’s the prioritization of cargo over passenger rail along with lack of investment. If they spent even half the money on rail that they do on automobile roads we’d have one hell of a good rail system.
The highway system costs 200-400 billion dollars a year split between state and federal government.
Meanwhile Amtrak gets about 1.5 billion dollars from the federal government.
It’s pretty simple. More investment to build more robust and more connected lines. High traffic lines could be multiple rails wide, so faster passenger trains (which are time sensitive) can pass slower freight trains.
The issue with our rail infrastructure is that lines have been reduced over and over. Also, despite legally amtrak being given priority, they rarely do get it. Freight trains are often too long to be able to let them pass, so they are no longer legally required to get out of the way, because there isn’t an alternative for them.
Freight causes issues with the current system, but it is not required to cause issues. It only causes issues because we have chosen to not invest in improving things.
Road wear scales as a cube of vehicle weight, so unless the heavier trucks are only 4.6% heavier than two trucks they'll cause more damage to the roads while consuming less fuel and therefore producing less fuel tax revenue which is used to repair the roads.
The federal diesel tax rate is 24.4 cents/gallon and hasn’t been changed since 1993 [not indexed to inflation], a time period that’s seen other inflation raise prices by some 65-75%.
It’s tough on the roads, but less trucks (even if each one is producing slightly more CO2 than usual) would be a net decrease in CO2 overall. Drivers better be on point though, the extra momentum is nothing to play around with.
news
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.