pipodeclown

Many people here are missing what the business model of banks is, they're in the business of creating absolute trust with their customers, as soon as that evaporates, the banks stops being viable. That means eliminating any (perceived) risk, whether real or not. From the banks perspective this move reduces the attach surface thereby reducing risk which is worth the tradeoff of an inconvenience to the 1% of people that would even care about this move.

There is a big difference between watxhing a movie and operating a device where your input makes things move on the screen, you notice the depay way more.

You can always notify the EC anti competition whatsdpg through their wistleblower portal:)

Demand is genrally destroyed in places where people can't afford the higher oil price which is most definately not the US. Poor countries are ehere people will suffer.

That really makes absolutely no sense. Derivatives whole purpose is to allow people to hedge their exposure to the underlying, in this case oil prices. Many parties active on these markets have such exposure but are unable or unwilling to take delivery as part of that hedging contract..

US workers most definately do not work the most of any country. Maybe relative to some rich western europeans you do but globally you are very much in the 'rich countries where the average working hours are quite low' category. There are even more than a few european countries with average working hours per worker that are higher than in the US.

Sure but that doesn't change the fact that they are charging s Ahead while the rest of us sit on our hands.

Plenty of countries have corporate laws that are less shareholder focussed than those of america. In the Netherlands for example boards are obligated to take into account broader sets of interest such as employee in their decisions and this is enforceable in court.

Sure but just for browsing, checking some e-mails, a bit of YouTube or other media consumption, you know what 90% of people use their macbook for 99% of the time, it would be fine.

Nobody is saying you should be able to render some 3d models on an iPhone..

Like what? A macbook is just a screen, connected keyboard and trackpad. This thing has the equivalent of all of that.

Man you see this crap pop up on here so many times I'm almost starting to wonder whether car industry shills are just trying so sow seeds of doubt with misinformation.. haven't we agreed by now that the only future we should strive for is one that can plausibly be made completely emmissionless...? All options you list either still have emmissions associated with them or are so hilariously inefficient that we would need to blanket half the globe with PV panels to power everything. All alternatives have been extensively explored and the only and most efficient way to power cars in an emmissionless way turned out to be a battery electric drivetrain. There is a reason all the options you list didn't take off.

Most of the Netherlands banks have switched to 4 dat workweeks, sure you don't get as much work done on 4 days but it sure is nice to have an extra day off:)

'Crew' implies that it is a group of people doing this and therefore they have 35 seconds. You can reconstitute the sentence to check what you should use. In this case you could say in your head:" the crew as a team check the video feed. They have 35 seconds to do this." If this was referring to an individual it would be: "Peter checks the video feed, he has 35 seconds to do this."

Sure but you should be comparing the goal end state, a world in which out energy consumption and generation is green, that's the whole point of our move to bev's and hydrogen. So you should be comparing energy generation by green means to power a BEV or using green energy to produce hydrogen to power a hydrogen car. In that world the whole energy production and consumption chain is about 3x as efficient for BEV, which in my mind means there is no way hydrogen is going to be competitive and we shouldn't waste valuable resources on persuing it.

That is completely incorrect, it is the opposite.