Why? I’m in favor of reform and making our system more like other developed nations. But single payer isn’t the only way it’s done, not even the most common way.
That’s the thing about American health care costs. We pay so much more than everyone else, but there’s no obvious single thing that costs more, or even a few factors together. It’s a ton of different things all adding up. Which means it’s very hard to fix, because there are so many different things you’d have to fix.
Good drama, good humor, good characters, and a very cozy feel in those quiet moments on the ship between things.
In contrast to the sibling comment, I fell in love with the series before I knew it had been canceled. When I finished season 1, I immediately went in search of season 2. When I couldn’t find it, I went to find out when it was going to be released. Discovering what had happened to it was tremendously disappointing.
What really blows my mind is how unusable it is. How often do you visit a web site and there’s so much crap overlaid on the page that you can barely see the actual content? Surely that can’t be good for their ability to make money, yet they persist.
The devs are the subject matter experts. Does marketing understand the consequences of preloading all those videos? Does upper management? Unlikely. It’s the experts’ job to educate them. That’s part of the job as much as writing code is.
If all of those things are true, then the conclusion is that theaters can’t operate in a way that wins my business. That would be unfortunate, but it’s not contradictory. It also seems to be that pretty much true, as I see a movie in a theater maybe once a year.
Actually, yes, I do think that netflix could do their job much cheaper. I use putflix, which uses put.io for $0.99 per month. Better quality streaming than netflix, no forced ads, and they can make it work for $1. Maybe it's the model where my monthly subscription pays for their entire catalog that's broken. Maybe it should just be a la carte licensing.
Either way, until the industry lets me pay directly to the org that literally made the movie, I'll just pirate.
I do want to pay the artists that make the films. I think the most viable way to do this is via cryptocurrency associated with social media accounts, and then validate ownership by having owners post a magic validation link. This way I can send artists money and it's on them to go get it if they want it.
putflix is criminal theft. They pay nothing to people who make movies. You can drive the cost to zero by downloading torrents directly from pirate bay.
If you did want to pay the artists then you would pay for netflix of rent/buy from a number of places (amazon video, youtube, apple).
Your cryptocurrency fantasy is just a way to rationalize stealing.
> rent/buy from a number of places (amazon video, youtube, apple).
It's just "rent", there's no buy option from any of these people, no matter what their site says. If they can revoke your ownership at any time, for any reason, then you don't own it. And if you don't own it, then you're not buying it.
I get the motivation to not pay these crooks, and instead pay the actual people that made the movie direct.
I believe they wrote that it is consistent to find sufficient utility from a $14 grilled cheese sandwich and also find insufficient utility from a whatever price movie theater experience.
It isn’t written out, but when people complain about the price of anything, they are complaining the price to utility ratio. Not exactly profound stuff, but that is basically what it is, most people don’t get a sufficiently better experience in theaters in today’s world.
The extension of my logic to Netflix would be, if I think their prices are too high and that causes me not to subscribe, and their prices are so high because they need to pay very high salaries, then there’s just no way that Netflix can exist in a form that I would subscribe to.
> the conclusion is that theaters can’t operate in a way that wins my business
They can, if studios gave them a better deal: "Most if not all the ticket price goes directly into the studio's pockets."
That is not a fact of nature, but the studio's whim. If they want to drive theaters out of business and send all their customers to the pirate bay, they are more than welcome to.
Once, when asked about arming teachers in school, Trump gave a brief answer that went, we should, but we shouldn’t, but we should, but we shouldn’t. Four contradictory answers to a binary question in one sentence.
The guy doesn’t even lie. He’s a reality TV actor working without a script. He says whatever he thinks will get ratings, and if he’s not sure then he’ll try different things and see what sticks.
It will never cease to baffle me that so many people saw this behavior and said, that’s leadership material.
A thought that recently came to mind about this was an article about a local homeless camp that was literally trashing the area in which it was set up. Those people have effectively been discarded by society -- so why should they care about the mess they make, after all, nobody cares about them?
So for the average voter who feels disenfranchised and abandoned by society, why should they care about what Trump says when he's famous, rich, and entertaining to watch?
That's the only way I can make any sense of the matter -- it still messes with my head.
Everything makes sense when you get out of your bubble and realise most people don't even own stock options. Do you think ants contemplate how the world looks like from a bird's eye?
None of it makes sense but it's somewhat understandable.
People are angry and they should be, but the anger is misdirected. People want to "burn this shit down" but they don't give any thought to what might rise from the ashes.
Democracy requires an educated electorate, and we're failing there both formally (schools) and informally (the rise of misinformation). Its beyond distressing to watch this play out so I'm going to stay in my bubble as much as I can.
Corolla demanded answers to complicated sociological questions. Newsome’s response was weak but I don’t see how that’s deflection. The question doesn’t matter to the topic being discussed. It’s an obvious gotcha question from an interviewer who just wants to make a ruckus. I don’t know why a professional politician can’t handle that, but bad handling of a stupid gotcha question is very different from contradicting yourself four times in ten seconds when asked a straightforward question about your own opinion.
This concept of “TDS” confuses me. Trump is a terrible person and a terrible president. Why wouldn’t I be Deranged about him? Thinking badly of him isn’t a Syndrome, it’s a natural consequence of the fact that he’s awful and he has way too much power over my life.
Right, it’s only a “gotcha” question if you’re not trying to communicate, and instead attempting to score cheap points with your dumber constituents.
You can do the same in reverse by letting a Republican give you their “obvious” definition then forcing them to try to nail jello to the wall by pointing out unintended (even by them) consequences of that, and the people who definitely exist and fall entirely outside their insistence on a binary (even in “biological” terms).
It’s because the actual argument is over who ought to be treated as a woman under which circumstances, not who “is” a woman. But if your audience will allow it it’s much simpler to just pretend the argument is over something else and your opponent is too stupid to define words we use every day.
I was talking about the question of why half of California Latinos do t have a checking account.
I’m sure plenty of gotcha questions get asked in the other direction. I don’t generally view the sort of media where people ask that kind of question, because it’s incredibly irritating and uninformative no matter who the target is.
My point is that Trump doesn’t even try to give a coherent answer. He’ll contradict himself within the same answer to a straightforward question and not even bat an eye.
> This concept of “TDS” confuses me. Trump is a terrible person and a terrible president
The only thing you need to understand "TDS" is knowing that it's the exact same accusation-in-a-mirror technique the fascists use on every other topic. By preemptively asserting that the critics are "deranged", they obscure the depth of their own reality distortion field for their cult leader. And for the casual observer who sees a bunch of drama and instinctively steers clear, the default conclusion is to think that the truth must be somewhere in the middle rather than doing the work to think about who is actually stirring up the chaos.
The point of communication in general is to alter the recipient’s mental state in certain ways. Maybe you want to alter their mental state such that they understand a technical problem. Maybe you want it to be a state that causes them to explain something. Maybe you want to alter their mental state such that they pick you up from the airport.
The key thing is that there is a particular goal, and if you want to achieve that goal, you need to work with people as they are, not as you wish them to be.
Unless you are as open to having your mental state altered by the other person as you expect the other person to be to having theirs altered by you, I don't think you're really communicating.
reply