I remember going to Disney Epcot Center as a kid and it showed how we would be living on the ocean floor by the year 2000. That is what I consider wild.
If you told me as a kid that I will go my whole life without owning a robot and that the main difference is we will replace a rotary phone with a hand held phone I would want my money back.
I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.
If you told my kids not only will they own a robot, their grandmother actually owns one, they wouldn't believe you. Just before they tripped over her roomba.
> I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.
Wasn't that a government flight aboard a government spacecraft that notably didn't make it to space? Not sure how that's related to a civilian flight aboard a civilian spacecraft.
Wages and prices are relative and there is always going to be groups of people at the bottom that are not going to have capital to invest.
So what? What is your point? There is no way around this fact. Of course this does not apply to them but so what? You must think this can somehow not be the case to even mention it.
Of course you are not going to get to financial freedom making the lowest wage possible? So what?
I use to rollerblade in the 90s. I never heard of this at the time I couldn't have possibly cared less if I had.
IMO the problem is I rollerbladed for 3 years and I never learned to stop properly. I basically had to fall on grass or cruise. IMO it died because it wasn't a good hobby for the average person. A skateboard doesn't have a speed problem like rollerblades. A bike has nice easy breaking system.
It was a giant 90s fad that was not a good idea for the average person. I loved them and wouldn't even consider getting a pair now based on the almost certainty of taking a massive spill.
Dragging your foot on a skateboard leaves your other foot planted on the board, meaning the board is vulnerable to catching on any crack or edge while carrying most your weight, which will send you tumbling.
You can drag your foot exactly the same way to lose speed on skates by dragging one perpendicular to the direction of travel, while your other foot is still perfectly capable of jumping you over any cracks or edges since the skates are strapped to your feet.
I'll admit it's easier to never go too fast for comfort on a skateboard, by simply not riding the skateboard; you get off and walk on shoes. Which is a problem for rollerblades. But that's kind of irrelevant beginner territory isn't it?
Once you're competent enough to be riding either at speeds above a run, the skateboard has significant speed governing challenges, as do rollerblades.
I street skated for years and never became competent enough to use power-slides for governing speed on anything but the most ideal uniform asphalt surfaces. To propose that as some kind of accessible braking method strikes me as disingenuous at best. For most, attempting that'll be a spectacular prelude to a broken clavicle.
To shed some lights on why power sliding is so unreliable, doing so requires to be familiar the surface on which you’re attempting it. Being familiar with it means that you basically failed to and fell down multiples times before getting it right, which already requires a good skill level.
And you cannot assume that power sliding on a surface will be similar to another one that looked the same because a slight change of humidity, dust or grease may totally change the outcome and transform the slide into a hang up that will throw you at the floor pretty hard.
So if you combine a really thin margin of error with the inability to confidently execute it on new surfaces, it makes powersliding a pretty unreliable way of braking unless it’s an emergency, in which case jumping off the board is much easier.
Meanwhile, you can power slide at will in the skate park because you know the surface by heart, and it’s easy to get it consistent by how many times you just rode it.
Your point is valid. Power sliding on the street, with speed, is definitely for advanced skaters. Particularly for the reasons you mentioned (unpredictable surfaces).
>Dragging your foot on a skateboard leaves your other foot planted on the board, meaning the board is vulnerable to catching on any crack or edge while carrying most your weight, which will send you tumbling
You're doing it wrong. If you catch a crack with your weight planted dead center of your board (which is how this is done) then you're already in dangerous territory. Speed is not your issue - the terrain (or your lack of proper technique) is.
>I street skated for years and never became competent enough to use power-slides for governing speed on anything but the most ideal uniform asphalt surfaces. To propose that as some kind of accessible braking method strikes me as disingenuous at best.
Disingenuous? How rude. That's how me and my friends did it. Maybe if you were below advanced-intemediate level then power-sliding to control for speed might seem impossible (but it isn't - that's the beauty of skateboarding). I will concede it's an unreliable method because of the variance of the surface (which the other commenter mentioned). It does come with risks and requires sufficient skill.
Curiously, your comment left out the obvious thing I mentioned. You can jump off the damn skateboard. It's one of the very first things you learn.
You can jump off.
My 8 year old does it every day. You know what he and his sister do when they get going too fast on 'blades? Look for a grass patch and hope for the best.
You seem to be slighted by the mere suggestion that one measly aspect of 'blading is harder or requires a different approach.
I skated for two decades, and worked in the industry for over half of that. If there's one thing I learned it's that skaters are funny creatures. Especially when it comes to beefs with their "adversaries" like rollerblading, BMX and scooters.
No, absolutely not. If anything, having controll on skateboard is harder pretty much no matter what context. And you have zero control over where the board goes once you abandon it on top of it - meaning you are more dangerous for anyone else.
And my point, after trying both, controlling speed on skateboard is harder. It does bit make it better sport nor anything like that.
Any sport on a competitive level is hard. Including running. The skateboarding has the property of not that much control and ease of loosing it. (Leads to injuries).
Like, trying to run out of skateboard does not work in higher speed. It is good solution for small speed, but once you go faster then you can run, it gets ugly. Meaning, injuries look very ugly. And the skateboard is going God knows when risking to hit someone or something (old person, stroller with baby, car). It is just not safe once you don't control the thing.
Your point is only valid for speeds faster than you can run.
I don't think that qualifies you to say "No, absolutely not" to my previous point when you really mean "except under extreme speeds".
I've also "tried both". I skateboarded for two decades and worked in the skateboard industry for over half of that. I'm now teaching my 8 year old to skate. He feels way more comfortable than on his rollerblades because it's way easier to bail out.
The skateboard hitting something else is not relevant to the point being discussed.
Speeds slower then you can run are slow in both cases and no issue to control in both cases. It is not like it would be difficult to control speed on Rollerblade and you stop falling on them pretty fast. Falling on Rollerblades is quite rare after compete beginner stage.
As bonus point, a single pebble or crack won't throw you down on Rollerblades the way skateboard does.
> The skateboard hitting something else is not relevant to the point being discussed.
It is massively relevant to the control in speed issue. The risk of hurting someone or something else matters.
Suggesting that anything less than running speed is relatively safe tells me that you have zero clue about the types of injuries involved in either activity.
The vast majority of inline skating injuries are forearm (typically wrist) injuries. This is usually from falling and putting ones arm(s) out to break the fall. This happens every single day at driveway speeds - Inline skate injuries at high speed (faster than you can run) are comparatively rare.
This whole sub-thread reeks of toxic skateboarder machismo. I lived around it long enough to recognize it (heck, I used to do it too). Now I just laugh.
The article talking about Tether:
"don’t be surprised when the Federal Reserve comes to its rescue."
This is completely delusional. As if the Fed is going to hold Tether on its balance sheet to stabilize the price in some crisis event? The lack of correlation with the broader markets is because of all these crypto Three-card Monte games happening that make the space seem much larger than it is. "500 billion" gets shaved off the "market cap" and the broader markets don't even notice.
Their marketing was starting to get to me as far as being the privacy company. I was really considering buying my first iphone. They had to know they were throwing all that marketing/effort down the drain.
There is no way they are going back on this. They will just wait out the collective short term memory to move on to something else. In a year this will just be normal. In 5 years all the other things that have been added to scan for will also just be normal.
For me, I am old and just accept we will live in an ever growing dystopian surveillance state. I am so grateful I was able to live my youth the way it was. If you are young? Yea, I have no answers.
May you live in interesting times? At least we have that going for us.
So many other factors contributing to this future too.
I.e. Manual labor continuously gets automated, so less low education positions available each year.
Upcoming climate crises that's going to displace a lot of people that won't have jobs anymore.
Air quality continuously worsening. We're globally at 415 CO2 now, up from below 300 before industrialization. With each sizeable increase people will statistically perform worse on intellectual tasks. If current trends continue we'll be at 500 before 2100.
Continuously improving neural networks/"ai" will make fully automated armed defenses on private properties viable, so this is likely the first time in history in which people in power won't be dependent on their guards, making worker uprisings basically impossible
I am glad as well that Im always well into my 30th and make an effort to enjoy each day without thinking too much about the future. It's looking grim, so all the more reason to enjoy the present
> If current trends continue we'll be at 500 before 2100.
Urban areas are already regularly over 500ppm. I know because my dad certified hospital air systems with a 500ppm limit. Hospitals are having to put carbon filter on their air intakes.
In the US at least though I believe zoning is the issue.
Our zoning laws are so bad and it is so hard to add to supply that no one really bothers much.
There are all kinds of dislocations in the market because what you should see right now is massive amounts of home building but you do not. 15 minutes away from me there is a ton of open land that could practically be built into a entire new town. I would imagine the larger the project the more bullshit you have to deal with when it comes to permits, zoning, political pushback, palms that need grease.
If you compare the work, risk/reward to alternative investments like just holding the stock market index it becomes a bad investment so it doesn't get made.
We have all these self reinforcing distortions happening in the market that probably can't be fixed.
>How is that person greedy compared to people with multiple houses?
They're greedy because they think the world owes them cheap housing just by virtue of being born. The person who owns multiple houses actually did some work to earn the money to pay for them, they're not the one eyeing other people's property with envy.
The problem here is that, in general, you don’t get to own multiple houses by being a hard worker. You could be an extremely hard worker, but not make very much money. You could be very lazy and make loads of money. The reality is that the housing market is on a trajectory where most people cannot and will not be able to afford ownership, even for white collar jobs. Wages do not go up quickly for most folks either, so the cost of acquiring a house relative to your income continues to rise.
More specifically, say you enter society making $80k in a major city. You’re young, so this is normal. At this point in time, a house is not an option, because a mortgage would require $100k in savings. And if the housing market continues increasing like it has the past few years, that amount keeps going up. For most people, the rate that house prices go up is quicker than the rate they can save towards a down payment.
It’s important to note that a quickly accelerating housing market is EXTREMELY beneficial for investors. It creates a feedback loop which makes investments more common, which makes the prices go up further. Spending $400k this year and selling for $500k next year is an excellent investment opportunity.
Is it greedy to think that one deserves a home? Likely not. Is it greedy to make some extra money via property investment? Maybe sometimes, maybe not. The point isn’t that property investment is inherently bad, but that property investment is pricing most people out of the housing market.
As a hypothetical, would you like to live in a society where homes are not accessible for 90% of people? I personally do not want to live in a society where housing is extremely scarce. That’s a recipe for societal upheaval. If property investment is making the market spiral out of control, which it likely is, it benefits most people to curtail that problem.
> They're greedy because they think the world owes them cheap housing
People want affordable housing not cheap housing.
> The person who owns multiple houses actually did some work to earn the money to pay for them
So if I hide my income in tax havens and evade taxes or if someone uses their wealth from a foreign country which they got using shady methods and then use that money to buy multiple properties, is that ok in your books?
If you told me as a kid that I will go my whole life without owning a robot and that the main difference is we will replace a rotary phone with a hand held phone I would want my money back.
I guess poor Christa McAuliffe has been totally forgot about also.