Cargill and Tyson for one. Both companies are keeping chicken prices artificially high and reaping huge margins.

This hasn't been true since the pandemic. The supply crunches have been used to obfuscate margin increases as a test to see what the market will allow before they react. We've proven that we'll keep buying and throw nearly all the blame at inflation and supply chain regardless of it often being the smallest part of a particular items inflation. This is true of most food stuffs increases to prices.

That is the real figure that I think sells this better than most metrics. If sales goes UP, then how can the efficacy be denied? I suspect that was one of the main selling points that pushed your company to continue 4 day. Think sales is where the movement should focus, because if they can prove more successful than the choice is obvious. Thanks again for sharing.

I appreciate this share, especially regarding difficulties as the pain points are where management will bristle on this topic. One additional question I would have is how are your sales people earning now? I assume they are comission focused. How are those commissions looking? Would be fascinating to me if they had similar performance.

I'm not going to read it for you. You asked for the source. There you go.

https://css.umich.edu/publications/factsheets/built-environment/us-cities-factsheet#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%2083,to%20live%20in%20urban%20areas.

I think a lot of this depends on if we ever actually get decent public transport like more trains.

The 2050 figure is 89%. I don't see people moving out of cities, just into smaller, cheaper ones. I'd be willing to bet that the result of that will be the urbanization of more almost-suburban areas in the future--more cities, rather than people living outside of one.

83% of Americans are living in urban areas, so uh, what?

Endure and survive.

I think 8% was not with a thunderbolt 3/USBC, but a direct line into the mobo with a pci-e extender.

40% is extreme though. That may be for TB2. It is a weird edge case regardless.

The efficiency loss can get as low as 8% on the last comparisons I saw. That may be even lower now. Also means you can have a much slimmer, cooler laptop. I nearly went this route last laptop I bought, but I ended up finding a steal when walmart refreshed their laptops to the 2000 series.

Even if we assume only 10% are any good, that's a lot of VR content.

There are several good shows on Peacock. If you aren't into the high seas, you could get something out of a month long sub for sure: the resort, killing it, girls 5 Eva, Rutherford falls, Vigil, bust down, wolf like me-- to name those I've seen.

I don't watch psych, but the new psych stuff is on there. One year of premium is $30.

They do this in Jacksonville near the downtown area at a gas station.

That headset poisoned the well of VR (as most Facebook/Oculus things did), by making people think VR was accessible and enjoyable untethered--not just wireless, but no PC.

Untethered is accessible, it's not long term enjoyable. Tethered VR is the opposite. It's long term enjoyable but not accessible. A major problem continues to be the amount of available content, as the comfort problem is rapidly improving with the Index and newer HTC headsets.

I would compare it to owning an early EV. They were expensive, not great, and not feasible for longer trips because charging wasn't there. Nobody wanted to build chargers or faster charging because people didn't want to buy EVs that couldn't go anywhere and took forever to charge, and because people didn't want to buy them they weren't building chargers or making improvements to charging/batteries. It's the same story with VR and VR Content.

It's not that VR isn't reaching the realm of being great the same way EVs were years back--it's that people don't want to buy them because there isn't enough to do on them. There has to be a threshold soon where either untethered VR actually gets great--which I doubt happens in the next 5 or maybe even 10 years--or wireless, PC VR is cheap and accessible enough that people are willing to get a PC to go with it.

That type of advance is what eventually got EVs the infrastructure they needed. The hardware has to advance before the content, but it's good enough now to not be a gimmick. Good enough to be a smart purchase for gamers is another question, unless you're into Sim.

Right. He would have had to have been underground. That would have been a great additional thing to make him do. Have to use geologists sampling tools to dig under the HAB. Could see that being a fun twist.

Weird it was based on so much research but that's the central moment that gets everything rolling. I haven't read the book to know if it's the same. Off the top of my head, they could have done a freak marsquake centralized at the ship that forced them to leave rapidly while Mark was out on research. Wouldn't have looked as cool on screen.

Background checks can show this, and there is some new thing from equifax or experian that I looked at that tracks your work history. You can turn it off though.

That does seem like a good deal.

That's fair, you're being charged to stick with a higher cost (but slightly more reliable) carrier in that case. I use a Verizon network, but third party, and pay $10 a month for 1 gig of data. They do not do replacement phones, only signup phones, but I'm guessing I pay about $50 less per month than you would for my 1 gig. That works out to $1200 difference for 2 years.

Edit: My plan also requires you have Comcast internet. So, that has to also be taken into consideration, but Comcast is the only good option where I live.

You don't have to get a new one every 2-4 years. I usually keep mine for 6-8 and they've all been fine at that 6 year mark except my droid turbo that had a terrible battery.

Batteries have gotten cheaper every year for the past 15 years. They're also banking on a 40% decrease in labor costs, which is the real savings to make them profitable.

Thess idiot geniuses finally realized that less parts means less labor means EVs make them more money. Transitioning to EV was always going to be a "we'll do it when it makes us more money". It'd be funny if we hadn't needlessly burned the planet up some more when we could have started making the switch in the 90s.

The infra is not. No one is rushing to build HCV gas stations like they are charging stations because the viability still isn't there for cars. As someone else said, maybe planes, but I've seen more push for SSB planes than HCV ones. That's what NASA has been testing and they have a lot of hydrogen fuel access if they wanted to go that route.

I'm not spending my money on it, but I'd say that based on preproduction and existing samples and manufacturing that is online already--solid state is further along than HCV mainly because there is so few HCV infrastructure.