• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 17th, 2023

help-circle
  • You miss the point of the discussion. The discussion is about how Fahrenheit relate to how humans interact with numbers and relate that number to temperature based on how that temperature feels.

    I am not saying Celsius is arbirtray, I am saying that 40 being really hot is a weird number for most humans to associate with “hottest weather you are somewhat likely experience”. Of course if you grew up with Celsius it feels second nature. But for someone who isn’t familiar with either Celsius or Fahrenheit, the 0 - 100 could be way more intutive. Fahrenheit still fails at this because the numbers between 0-100 don’t really add up with what’s intuitive.

    That’s why I said the original argument of “Fahrenheit is how humans feel” doesn’t work.


  • No, Celsius doesn’t make more sense in regard to how humans feel. It just feels more intuitive to us because we are used to the numbers. But if you try to explain the scala to someone the numbers feel entirely arbitrary with no real reason behind it. Why is 40 the really hot? 40 is such a weird number for humans.

    0 being cold, 100 being hot makes sense, anyone can grasp that concept. But the inbetween steps of Fahrenheit make no sense. It isn’t intuitive, it only makes sense if you are used to them. A intuitive scala would be:

    0 - cold, you need proper winter clothes 25 - chilly, you need a light jacket 50 - room temperature 75 - getting uncomfortably hot 100 - too hot, heatstroke is a real danger



  • A lot of users are also from poorer countries that lack the means to create their own web infrastructure. Using Facebook to run your business account is easier, cheaper, and more reliable than most alternatives there. Phone carriers and ISP often also have “free”-data for certain social media platforms. You get 1GB+1GB for Facebook/IG/YT/Some Game. So you are stuck in this loop where everything reinforces itself to use Facebook.




  • There is no better alternative than turning these offices into housing. Forcing people to work in offices again is worse and keeping them empty is also worse.

    A big advantage of converting them is there is already a lot of desirable infrastructure in place. Public transportation, shops, restaurants, everything is there already. Building apartment complexes at the edge of town might be cheaper but there usually is nothing there.

    I also doubt that it’s actually cheaper to raze and rebuild for that many buildings. The only real trouble is upgrading the plumbing. Everything else is definitely offset buy using the existing shell.

    Some buildings have a floorplan that doesn’t really work for residential but there is also no need to convert all offices. Pick the ones that are best suited and keep the remaining to satisfy the reduced need for office space.

    The only real issue is that the current owner of the building obviously prefer just forcing people back into office since that’s more profitable. So it would take government subsidies and incentives for them to make the switch more profitable. And then we are once again putting hundred of millions into the pockets of already rich people. But it’s cheaper for the city and better for the people so while a tough pill to swallow, it’s still beats any alternative.



  • No, not really. But that’s more because the government and economy of China and the USA works fundamentally different. The US does a lot of foreign investment. But it’s done by the private sector. Chinese companies aren’t allowed to do foreign investments without approval of the Chinese government. So everytime a “private” Chinese company does an investment abroad, the Chinese government is directly involved.

    The closest would probably be the landlease to Ukraine. All/most of the aid packages have to be paid back. Not necessarily with direct payments but by awarding (re-)building projects to US companies.

    And obviously there is the IMF where the US pays the highest quota to and therfore has the highest voting power in how the money of the IMF is distributed.