If the song lyrics are relevant to the scene, sure I could see them being there. Like those songs that are custom written to do a sort of 4th wall breaking live commentary on the characters. But a lot of songs? Not needed at all.
When my wife and I are driving (anywhere) and we see a dog we excitedly point "DOG!" and then talk about how cute / good the dog looks. Or if I'm on my own I'll come back and say "I saw a dog when I was driving" and a similar conversation. I thought everyone did this.
Holy crap this is such a good and well written set of articles. I can't speak to the accuracy of everything, though it seems to have been researched and written with accurate intent, but the parts that I live are spot on. Lots of little cool details in there. Shoutout to the thing autistics often do where we redefine terms on the fly in a conversation so we're sure our message is communicated correctly, like "X can mean a few different things, so I'll say Y when I mean thing 1 and Z when I mean thing 2", which reminded me of some Flying Circus sketch where they awkwardly created a overt double hand spin gesture to indicate that they were done talking and it's the other person's turn to talk and not just the end of their sentence.
This feels like the difference between cars vs pedestrians as the more important user. Having drains on each side means that even if there's some good buildup of water, the crowned center means you're more likely to be able to fit one car through, but you totally wipe out the sidewalks. I'm all for /c/fuckcars and would prefer sidewalk use, but I can see the other way winning in the US as roads are primarily designed for cars. Maybe dense city centers could prioritize sidewalks, but more rural stuff and stroads could prioritize roads.
This is a side point, but I get mildly infuriated when articles like this state "Some leaders say they insist on full-time in-person work because it boosts productivity, despite clear evidence that it does not." Oh? Clear evidence? I can't find any. Can you? There are 3 journal articles referenced in that sentence, none of which say anything about productivity. I poked around Google Scholar and find that productivity gain / loss is still unknown, and depends greatly on the work and the field. Do you have to use actual physical stuff in an office? Definitely lower productivity working from home. Do you work with a team that's all in the same office? Also a solid productivity loss. But if you don't work with anyone in your office and all your stuff is online? No probably no productivity loss (but I didn't find a specific reference there).
I've seen a ton of posts saying WFH is so clearly better for revenue and productivity, and it's more about the sunk cost of the office space rented or a boss wanting to lord over his employees. And yes, I like that narrative and it works well for me, but the actual research just isn't there and it bugs me that it's stated like a solid irrefutable fact. It's not! it's a gray area! it depends!
Spam away. I've been on hiring committees, and sometimes we have tons of qualified applicants and a hard choice, sometimes we have none. If you spam you'll have a better chance of hitting a company when there's fewer people in their list. As long as you're somewhat qualified, at least; no reason to spam for jobs that are vastly outside of what you can do.
Yep, had a friend who worked housekeeping or something on those empty mansions. He said that in general for that area people tended to use the house for like a week or two in the year and the rest of the time it was totally empty. They apparently had like 10-20 houses like that and just didn't use them.
From the trial brief: "The earnout amount is calculated by multilpying the Maximum One-Year Revenue above $69.8 million by 3.12, with a cap at $250 million". So every $ above $69.8mil they have to pay 3.12x for every $1 in sales. How many copies depends on the country I suppose as costs vary, but if it was all US based at $30/each that would be ~2.3mil copies sold. Not sure on the timeframe. Higher and faster the better tho.
If the song lyrics are relevant to the scene, sure I could see them being there. Like those songs that are custom written to do a sort of 4th wall breaking live commentary on the characters. But a lot of songs? Not needed at all.
When my wife and I are driving (anywhere) and we see a dog we excitedly point "DOG!" and then talk about how cute / good the dog looks. Or if I'm on my own I'll come back and say "I saw a dog when I was driving" and a similar conversation. I thought everyone did this.
Holy crap this is such a good and well written set of articles. I can't speak to the accuracy of everything, though it seems to have been researched and written with accurate intent, but the parts that I live are spot on. Lots of little cool details in there. Shoutout to the thing autistics often do where we redefine terms on the fly in a conversation so we're sure our message is communicated correctly, like "X can mean a few different things, so I'll say Y when I mean thing 1 and Z when I mean thing 2", which reminded me of some Flying Circus sketch where they awkwardly created a overt double hand spin gesture to indicate that they were done talking and it's the other person's turn to talk and not just the end of their sentence.
wrote down: Circles are round
Literally getting ready for bed, listening to my spouse info dump about the Cardiff Giant from an article earlier today. It's great.
The greatest thing since torn up bread
This feels like the difference between cars vs pedestrians as the more important user. Having drains on each side means that even if there's some good buildup of water, the crowned center means you're more likely to be able to fit one car through, but you totally wipe out the sidewalks. I'm all for /c/fuckcars and would prefer sidewalk use, but I can see the other way winning in the US as roads are primarily designed for cars. Maybe dense city centers could prioritize sidewalks, but more rural stuff and stroads could prioritize roads.
Ok but actually
Aww!
This is what my cat looks like after climbing my pantry shelf, and prying the lid off my crock pot
This is a side point, but I get mildly infuriated when articles like this state "Some leaders say they insist on full-time in-person work because it boosts productivity, despite clear evidence that it does not." Oh? Clear evidence? I can't find any. Can you? There are 3 journal articles referenced in that sentence, none of which say anything about productivity. I poked around Google Scholar and find that productivity gain / loss is still unknown, and depends greatly on the work and the field. Do you have to use actual physical stuff in an office? Definitely lower productivity working from home. Do you work with a team that's all in the same office? Also a solid productivity loss. But if you don't work with anyone in your office and all your stuff is online? No probably no productivity loss (but I didn't find a specific reference there).
I've seen a ton of posts saying WFH is so clearly better for revenue and productivity, and it's more about the sunk cost of the office space rented or a boss wanting to lord over his employees. And yes, I like that narrative and it works well for me, but the actual research just isn't there and it bugs me that it's stated like a solid irrefutable fact. It's not! it's a gray area! it depends!
We'll solve it with AI
Spam away. I've been on hiring committees, and sometimes we have tons of qualified applicants and a hard choice, sometimes we have none. If you spam you'll have a better chance of hitting a company when there's fewer people in their list. As long as you're somewhat qualified, at least; no reason to spam for jobs that are vastly outside of what you can do.
"Would you like to be stabbed or punched in the face? If you don't pick one we'll go for the stabbing."
I hate it, but please vote.
Did you post this just because of the name?
and is the shareholder value in the room with us now?
Yep, had a friend who worked housekeeping or something on those empty mansions. He said that in general for that area people tended to use the house for like a week or two in the year and the rest of the time it was totally empty. They apparently had like 10-20 houses like that and just didn't use them.
Friend of mine always said he liked "watching chicken TV". He retired and #1 was looking forward to doing that all day + scotch.
What the hell man. You vaguely seemed to like it one time when you were 3. It's like you think we don't even pay attention.
From the trial brief: "The earnout amount is calculated by multilpying the Maximum One-Year Revenue above $69.8 million by 3.12, with a cap at $250 million". So every $ above $69.8mil they have to pay 3.12x for every $1 in sales. How many copies depends on the country I suppose as costs vary, but if it was all US based at $30/each that would be ~2.3mil copies sold. Not sure on the timeframe. Higher and faster the better tho.