Thanks for this! I have been using iCloud Keychain for a while and was generally satisfied. However, it wasn’t until I recently switched from desktop Safari to Arc that I considered a third party password manager, but was stuck in decision paralysis.
Given the overwhelming responses in this post, BitWarden it is!
I understand what you are trying to do, and we’re probably of the same mindset. However, in my experience, there is no point reasoning with someone who is purposefully try to stir shit up.
Spending air time trying to convince OP that there are valid abortion scenarios takes away from women who simply do not want to carry a child. There should be no external justification needed: their body, their choice.
That’s ironic
I remember the debate in /r/formula1point5 at the start of this year and last to determine where to draw the cutoff line.
I’ve changed my mind - removing Max alone, and it suddenly becomes very very exciting.
What was Plan B, Ricci? I forgot.
Max topping the WCC with only his WDC points really sums of 2023 thus far…
Beauty!
I wonder why abysmal has a second hump around 5? Could it be that survey readers do not understand it?
It’s definitely not a bank giveaway - the bank group is likely furious. They are hung with $13bn of debt, that is not sellable, and worse, has virtually no pathway to be sellable in the near future. It’s tough to figure out where this debt would be marked, but I would guess the Street has unrealized losses in the $3-5Bn range.
Then the banks will take possession of Twitter, and probably arrange a (fire) sale to a financial sponsor. There is no chance the banks will role over like others that Musk is not paying. It’s much more cut and dry on term loans or bridge loans.
The bank group is furious with Twitter/Musk.
Compact is available :)
Settings -> Content -> toggle Compact View.
I thought it was missing at first because it wasn’t in the Appearance section of the Settings.
I think delivery workers deserve a fair, livable wage, but I am not sure that this is the way to do this.
If this goes through, I could see this playing out in a couple ways:
I would guess that fees go up to cover increased mandated wages. However, since the apps will not want headline costs to rise much more (already have a reputation for large markups, large percentage of fees, and consumer is getting more and more stressed), they could remove the ability to tip, and advertise that slightly higher fee is now “all-in” pricing, to keep headline costs similar on average. This is potentially detrimental to delivery workers depending on earnings/tip mix and shares that the apps skim from each.
Adding an additional fee per order (on average $5 per order as quoted in a NYT article) on something that has relatively elastic demand, will likely be detrimental to all involved, as volumes could drop more than the increase in price. In this scenario, everyone loses: the consumer, the delivery worker, the third party, local restaurant.
Adding an additional fee per order, and the apps experience little to no change in demand (relatively inelastic). This would only hurt the consumer, and would benefit delivery work and tech co’s. However, I have a hard time believing that demand for delivery is super inelastic given food inflation, state of the consumer, and generally perception on food delivery price already.
Not trying to be a corporate shill, but the economist in me is always hesitant when the solution is market interference. In reality, its probably somewhere between the extremes of 2 and 3, and determining where on that spectrum it ends up is quite nuanced.