In the United States (which I’m mentioning because that’s the location of the survey we’re discussing), something like 85%–90% of people live in places that are car-dependent. It’s closer to 100% outside of cities. So a vehicle is an expense that can’t be avoided. We’re looking at loan payments (probably), insurance (definitely), gas, and repairs. The lower your income, the better the odds that all four of those expenses go up, as you’re less likely to have a good down payment or buy in cash, and more likely to have your options reduced to older and lower-end vehicles. That typically means lower gas mileage and guarantees more frequent repairs. You’re also likely to live in a lower income area with higher insurance premium rates.

Of course, despite the rate of car dependence, about a third of Americans do not have reliable access to a dependable vehicle. That’s some very unfortunate math.

It’s hard to be poor in the U.S.

deleted by creator

Where I live, the libraries have regular sales, but then also the whole library system together will have semiannual book sales at the civic center. Everything is cheap to begin with but then on the last day, you can fill a box for $10 or $20—and the box can be as big as you like, as long as you can get it out of the building. They really need to get rid of the books. You should check with your library and see how they get rid of their culled books.

Upon closer reading, I think the key was imagining what you’d do with a future partner. No one imagines how much nothing they’re really gonna do nowhere

Looks like they’ve pulled the file. Good.

With media and the public discourse in the state they’re in today, this would surely be impossible to enforce. Every viewpoint can be argued to have infinite counter viewpoints and people treat it like a sport. Maybe the people of 1949 were naive enough to reckon there were two sides to every argument, but implementing this today would be akin to outlawing any kind of controversial statement or discussion in the media. Perhaps the end of politics as we kn…

Ok I’m starting to come around

deleted by creator

To be fair, the context in which they invoked the case assumed we’d all remember those details already.

Beeps don’t usually come from a speaker, no. You might find this old ELI5 about electronic sound interesting.

There’s a lot of wisdom here. OP may appreciate it even more after they’ve dug themselves out, because this mindset will allow them to keep from letting it get so bad again…if they can teach it to their mom.

It sounds like a way of raising the price while incentivizing cash payment (because maybe just maybe they aren’t claiming all their cash sales)

I’m not accusing you of making excuses for them, because all you’re giving is a reason, and you’re right. And at first it does feel like an excuse. But “management finds that it’s easier” deserves more of our focus and pressure. If they’re big enough that it’s hard to manage basic employee rules/discipline on the ground, they’re probably also big enough to be pocketing loads of profit. It’s reasonable to expect that they’d to allocate some of those spoils to finding better solutions than “throw all the food away.” For instance, if you pay people what their work is worth, they’re less likely to risk termination by taking your old cookies.

When you buy keyed doorknobs and deadbolts, there’s sometimes (always?—not sure, but def sometimes) a sticker on each package with a code. This lets you look through the available inventory to find and buy additional locks with the same code so that if you need multiple locks for the same house, they can all use the same key.

So no, as others have said, mass produced locks aren’t unique, but sometimes that’s a benefit.

Edit to add: it’s okay that locks aren’t unique, because the lock itself isn’t really what keeps people from entering locked doors. Mostly it’s the social contract. Your house key might unlock several houses in your neighborhood, but you’re not gonna try it, because how would you explain yourself if you got caught? And if you weren’t worried about that, then you’d probably be okay with just smashing the window…which means that for someone who would violate it, the lock is moot.

This is a fun idea, but unfortunately Amazon’s search results are pay to play. (That’s why they’re always so bad.)

And hardware fingerprint scanners :(

It’s generally tougher in the U.S. because a lot of our smaller cities were founded post-automobile, post-suburbia and post-shopping malls, and as such they don’t have town centers. At best they might have a main retail corridor.

You can’t say with certainty that you’d derive no stimulation from that, since you have not tried deriving stimulation from it.

The multi-billion dollar entertainment industry isn’t there because we need it. It’s there because we like it. What we need is to connect with the real world, which is a skill, and as such requires practice.

If you aren’t willing to work on your social skills, you need to stay in a position where you don’t need them.

The radios would need to have a very, very short range to avoid this. You’d need to know that everyone who can hear you can also see you (and potentially follow you if they’d like a word face to face), which is the accountability aspect that’s missing from online interactions.

Yeah, password on its own is weak. Any factor + password will always be a lot more secure than password alone OR the other factor alone, but pairing stronger factors of course results in stronger pairings.

Passkey is a device check (the key lives on your device and nowhere else), so it relies on your device security, even if it’s just a PIN…and there has to be a backup option in case you lose access to that device, in which case the account only ends up as secure as that authentication method…which hopefully isn’t password alone.