tmh79

>>> "But there is no place for it today, where better scholarship exists and the Internet provides ready access to a plethora of view points"

Thats now how history works at all man. Pretty much all writing on history goes into the metaphorical dust bin maybe 20-40 years after it is created but the "dust bin" isn't a dead place that no one should ever explore, its the world of historiography, and understanding how people understood their point in time at different points in time. No one should read a history book like its the bible handed down from on high, they should read it knowing the authors biases, the contemporary views on the authors work from other experts in the field, and an understanding of their own knowledge level and context. The reality is that a huge amount of K-12 American history education is propaganda and for someone with a K-12 American history background this book is a very compelling read that provides a useful counter narrative to what they have been taught, the main function of which is not to blindly trust the words in the book, but to understand the practice of history not as a recitation of facts but an analysis of past events with a specific point of view, and how different points of view from authors with different motivations can give different views of the past. IMO, this really brought the field of history to life for me.

Uber would set hours because they would only hire people to work at times when there is demand. You would not be able to "clock in" at will, because there might not be any rides for you to take, and thus no reason for you to get paid.

I dunno man, im getting kind of jaded as I get older. "True moonshot" to me seems more like cheap clean water for everyone, or a real way to sequester carbon, not a way for rich folks to get to their country cottages faster.

Some 100+ comments on here and no mention of the horrible impact having more of these giant trucks around is going to have on the climate. This is technically interesting, but experience shows us that most of these trucks will be purchased by suburban dwelling office workers who commute 90+ minutes/work in this thing, and use the plug in feature 2x/year tops. We really need to stop seeing enormous trucks as socially acceptable and need to start seeing them as sociopathic.

There are lots of self employed people that own nice trucks, but the primary sales target of the F150 is a wealthy office worker who lives in the suburbs. By far their biggest customer base is people who like the aesthetics of the truck but do not need a truck, and do not use the features of the truck beyond its size.

demand has changed quite a bit, lots of people are leaving cities, and fewer people, especially new grads from undergrad and profession school like business/med, are moving in.

how is this contradictory?

Firms that are monopolistic are less competitive, larger, and slower growing. Reducing monopolistic tendencies increases capital growth, competition, and reduces average firm size. This is well understood economics.

Monopolies arent' some hypercompetitive ultra capitalist battlespace, they're fat and happy, and the most impactful teams they employ are lobbyists and policy folks in DC. Look at like, comcast and what they did with the FCC.

Vast majority of these offices are small hubs in tier 3 cities occupied by regional tems, or tier 1 cities with multiple offices.

"Uber is absolutely not on the scale of those companies, and most of the time they should probably be using off-the-shelf solutions when they become available."

I agree, but I'd also add that the state of the world in 2016 when most of these infra projects were launched is very different from the state of the world in 2020. Back then, uber was not easily able to run on a bunch of OSS/cloud native solutions, but now for sure its not just possible but likely the best/most responsible way to do it [source: worked there for 4+ years]

IMO, there is a lot of hocus pocus going on in the "medical error is the 3rd leading cause of death" statistic, and the case they chose to highlight is extremely atypical. The vast majority of health care spending and the vast majority of medical resources are spent on old people in their last 18 months of life. Most deaths due to medical error are very old people undergoing risky and invasive surgeries they demand to have and are unlikely to have a great outcome in, not children. How much of the blame should be placed on the doctor when the patient is 80+ years old, has comorbidities, has been counseled on the risks, and wants to proceed with treatment? Bypass surgery is quite effective on someone younger than 60 who is also put on a diet and exercise regimen, and doesn't have diabetes. Bypass surgery is not effective for someone over 60 who is obese and has diabetes and will not change their diet habits.

earlier leak said 20% of employees across all departments

Solidarity must enter the equation because if you don't take care of those who are vulnerable, the economy will tank worse than it already has. People dying is expensive, and this many people dying is a lot more expensive than the cost of keeping things officially shut down.