It doesn't help that under-main-roof garages seem to be designed to only just fit small to medium sized cars despite the significant, rampant inflation of car sizes over the past few years.
My family tend to opt for smaller cars, because we're practical and don't have the faulty 'keeping up with the Joneses' gene, which means we can fit two cars in a two car garage.
We may still be in the majority, but it feels like it won't be for long.
UMR garage sizes should be inflating with the average car size. The Ford Ranger, essentially a fucking truck, and completely impractical, is the highest selling car in Australia because of backwards-thinking tax incentives from a few years ago, and then the ensuing Joneses effect.
Or maybe big vehicles which are inefficient from the point of view of physics (bigger = more energy to move around), take more space and damage the road more (more heavy, more bad for road) should be banned or taxed accordingly instead of having the law change the size of garages ?
This is true. Back when I was EV shopping, the number of models that were both proper modern EVs and could fit reasonably in my garage was shockingly small.
There will almost certainly be more pandemics and they'll probably be worse. The world is getting smaller, and what takes a super high end lab these days (in terms of virus creation) will be done by college students in 20 years.
I firmly believe that William Gibson nailed it with the Jackpot in his recent books:
nothing you could really call a nuclear war. Just everything else, tangled in the changing climate: droughts, water shortages, crop failures, honeybees gone like they almost were now, collapse of other keystone species, every last alpha predator gone, antibiotics doing even less than they already did, diseases that were never quite the one big pandemic but big enough to be historic events in themselves.
I'd like to say that there may be some human cultures that are / were generally respectful to their environment and the animals therein, but it's hard to say how much that was an 'enforced' position based on their level of technological evolution.
I think it's a fundamental rule that the 'rape and pillage' types will always overrun the non-'rape and pillage' types. Much in the same way the sociopaths are able to climb the corporate ladder with relative ease. The nature of nature, seemingly.
> in the months leading up to the referendum, the government and several pro-government public figures and political commentators openly criticized the 2008 Constitution, particularly its recognition of Nature as a subject of rights, emphasizing that no other constitution in the world contains such a provision.
As a kid I remember wondering why all the countries that exist seem to be jerks. Why aren't there any nice countries? Then I thought about it for another 5 seconds and it made a lot more sense.
No I mean if you set up a simulation where there's a bunch of entities who are chill and a bunch of entities who are not chill, and then you run the simulation...
Cooperation usually beats out competition though. Which is why for all that things look bad right now, alliances of at least modestly liberal countries have handily dominated and out-competed most autocracies. And the autocracies that have thrived have mostly done so by liberalizing, at least a little.
Maybe it's only legacy, but gmail brings customers to Google and their related services. Escalation then brings them on as paying Customers. As loss leader may make a loss if looked at in a bubble, but if looked at as part of the "Customer Lifecycle" then other areas of profit would likely be much smaller without the free gateway.
It takes me active resistance to avoid Google's paid services, and I'm staunchly independent in relatively rare air. The minor capitulation required to turn into a paying Customer would capture a good percentage of their erstwhile-free gmail users (I would think. Yes, conjecture, interested in explanations of alternative theories).
Can vouch for the loudness capability of large lungs.
A lady sitting in front of me at the football said she could feel the vibrations in her chest when I was loudly booing at the footy.
I had an x-ray a couple of years ago and was asked if I was a smoker, strangely because of the size of my lungs. Apparently, ironically, smokers lungs are larger than average and I have to assume it's to balance out all the damage that smoking does. I used to be a swimmer, so I figured my lungs must have developed from the requirement of controlled breathing as part of swimming (and the general fitness and therefore additional oxygen processing requirements).
reply