It's the title the author, a war journalist, chose for his article. It may be a mistake of his, or, my interpretation, it may well be a wordplay, given the content he is discussing.
Had ISDN in the mid-90s back when I worked for an ISP. Wasn't expensive from my telco, 40 1996 dollars a month and the cost of a Motorola BitSURFR Pro. Got dial-up bonding working on the ISP side. It could "ring through" one of the B-channels when a call came in and stay connected on the other. A wonderful time.
I had a very similar experience. For 1995 it was really quite amazing! Loved how quickly it connected ("I never have to listen to a pair of modems sniff each others butts again!"), and that I could place/receive a call while still being online. Also, the voice quality really was superior, even when receiving a call from a regular POTS call on the other end.
Unfortunately, after the first year of having it, US West (Omaha Nebraska USA telco) started "actively discouraging" ISDN (source, I worked at US West at the time and was asking a sales tech about it). I had wanted to move to a larger apartment in the same building, but doing so would have increased my ISDN cost from $40/mo to by-the-minute $400-ish/mo.
I used a Motorola Bitsurfer on Linux. But my other computer, an HP 9000s712 ("Gecko") had an ISDN modem that was SCSI. That seemed like a weird choice, but their serial port was only rated up to 115.2K so it was the only choice for 128K.
The article is simply incorrect when it says that Youtube Music doesn't allow streaming of one's own personal library. It does - up to 100,000 songs.
This functionality has been available since 2020, around the time when Google Play Music (which always had the ability to play from a personal library) got absorbed into Youtube Music.
We need to start looking at obesity as a hunger disorder, and not as the result of an addiction, a lack of knowledge about nutrition, or a lack of self control.
When an obese person regulates their eating and loses weight, the hunger often doesn't go away - and often increases. This is physical, not psychological hunger. When the obese person almost inevitably returns to eating to fullness, they regain weight.
When a person takes GLP-1s, hunger is greatly reduced, and an obese person can eat less food while still achieving satiety without gaining weight. When they stop taking the GLP-1s, the hunger returns, and when they return to eating to fullness, they regain weight.
Similarly, when a person takes stimulant weight loss medication, they can eat less food while experiencing less hunger, and thus lose weight. Similarly, when they go off of the stimulant (or develop a tolerance), the hunger returns and when they return to eating to fullness, they regain weight.
In many obese people, the hunger is present even when they eat a nutritious meal at the appropriate number of calories to maintain their weight. Common advice is to say "this mix of macros or foods makes me satisfied!" and, well, that's great for you but not universal.
People who naturally feel reasonably satisfied with an appropriate number of calories to maintain their weight still experience hunger, but not with the intensity or insatiability of that hunger that many obese people do.
While it does occur with some who have severe eating disorders, most obese people do not overeat themselves into obesity by continuing to eat long after they're full. They eat until the hunger goes away.
It's the hunger. Take away the hunger, and the weight goes down. Bring back the hunger and the weight goes up. It's simple, it's obvious, and few say it.
In many obese people, the hunger is present even when they eat a nutritious meal at the appropriate number of calories to maintain their weight. Common advice is to say "this mix of macros or foods makes me satisfied!" and, well, that's great for you but not universal.
Yup..the high failure rate of dieting is true regardless of the type of food or the macros. Lecturing to 'just eat healthy' as the default mode of advice does not work for the large majority of obese people..this is supported by the literature and anecdotal evidence.
With ICE cars? OK, perhaps. With BEV cars? No, no, no. Also, no.
You can buy an insanely great BEV for 40% of retail after it's gone off lease after 2-3 years. Everyone is concerned about battery life, but it'll have years to go.
I'm not going to be interviewed for the segment, but I have personally bought a like-new, just-off-lease BEV for a fraction of the retail price of the car and it is really very good.
EV depreciation is non linear. You lose a lot of the value in the first year because new EVs get better in ways that ICE cars long stopped improving. They get better ranges, faster charging, better battery longevity, more efficiency, etc. For some older models, you can get nice discounts on them new because of this or there are attractive incentives that somewhat moderate the impact of this effect.
After the first year, they tend to depreciate at a slower pace than ICE cars for the simple reason that there's not much that can go wrong with them and they are covered under rather long warranties. Most second hand EVs out there produced after 2017 are still under their original drive train warranty (typically eight years or 100K miles, whichever comes first). 2017 was when the Model 3 entered the market. Most popular second hand EV models are much newer than that. Unless they've driven more than 100K miles, they'd typically still have all the expensive bits under warranty.
Whether it makes sense to buy them new depends on what you are buying and where and why. Most private owners would be well advised to look for newish second hand models that are maybe 1-3 years old. The US is in a bit of a market bubble; EVs are very expensive there. And it's not seeing the same price competition. Elsewhere, EU, Asia, Australia, etc. you have a lot of low cost models undercutting their ICE equivalents for ridiculously low prices. Think 15K for low end models. Less in China. And even those will depreciate. But even those cars still see rapid improvements year on year.
As the owner of a 2012 BEV (still going), I do not believe that BEVs are getting substantially better year over year. Are they getting better? Of course! Within a period of a few years? Yeah, no, that's not actually a thing.
That's an interesting take. I know you said you're not looking to be interviewed, but could you tell me how recently you bought the BEV? Also, at a fraction of the retail price after 2 to 3 years; couldn't have been a Tesla. Was it a Tesla?
The early Leafs always had a fairly standard (for the time) Li-ion battery, but the corner they cut until a few years ago was to make it air-cooled rather than the liquid-cooled systems of most competitors. That made the earlier Leafs cheaper, but the batteries had far greater issues with longevity.
It's going to be interesting to see the LiFePO4 generation of EVs, which are going to be far less exciting to drive, but could potentially be rather cheap.
I knew something about it differed, I wasn't sure what it was. If they kept their cooling model, a lot of prior buyers may say "nah, that was a bad choice last time"
Although TBH I think the main thing about leaf was the range was dire. It suited people with zero range anxiety doing city runabout, and almost nothing else according to the rumour machine. (rumours are bad, but often grounded in some underlying issue)
Sure, postal banking [0] has been around forever. Could it be updated to the modern day and in the US? Of course! Why not? Because we apparently just can't have nice things.
It's a perfectly good idea that just doesn't have political traction in this era.
We could also have, you know, universal health care. Like any other normal country.
- Hydration as a Behavioral Addiction (Immortan Joe, 2015)
reply