Why do you think baskets should be required? To prevent theft? This has been implemented for a decade now, evidently thievery isn’t much of a concern.
There are no doubt multiple factors at play, but when things are easy and quality of life is decent, the honour system works.
That could work also, but not all shops have carts, and people don’t always need a basket. It’s common enough to scan things and pop them directly into a bag you brought, skipping the need for a basket altogether.
I think it was some struggling artist that got fed up and shot their leader, wasn’t it?
It was more accurately described as computer vision at the time, but your memory is right. They wanted to get to 5% of sales being human reviewed, but it was more like 70%.
What’s funny about Amazon’s efforts for Just Walk Out is that checkout free shopping already existed. Simply by letting customers carry a handheld scanner and payment terminal around the store with them.
“I don’t see what the problem would be.” - Italian Interior Ministere Matteo Piantedosi
Imagine not having an imagination.
I’m no fashion icon but I do find it annoying that most clothing I come across is symmetrical. I don’t know what I like more, the asymmetry or the pocket of champions. Incredible.
If you have a link to wherever you got it I wouldn’t mind having a window shop. Thanks for sharing!
Not for nothing, but there’s no quote threatening to fly into Canadian airspace if these jets don’t get bought. Only a statement that if Canada doesn’t buy them, another use will have to be found. Which is of course what would happen - they aren’t going to just park these things. Even looking at it as a veiled threat, it’s pretty vague.
I’m not sure what Lockheed expects when the cost has gone up nearly 50% in three years. I wish Saab good fortune making domestic alternatives.
Is it at least a good sweater?
I had an imported parcel get lost last year, and the seller was kind enough to just send out another. I paid the fees for the replacement and then after six months the original parcel showed up. Funny how that happens.
That is something I had thought of when I was considering an electric toothbrush; why don’t the charging bases cradle the middle of the brush so it can lay on its side? It could fit in a drawer or a vanity that way, and wouldn’t risk becoming coated in dried saliva paste. Must be since it’s not as elegant or something.
Anyway, I’m still using manual brushes (I know), but I both tap on the sink edge and use a thumb a few times across the bristles after a rinse to flick the water off. Not 100% effective, but it’s fine for the short lifespan of a manual brush.
Who really lost? You perceive this back and forth as something that can be won or lost? Both you and I are arguing semantics from behind screens, not out risking our life and limb. There are no winners here.
I got it from the comment you wrote.
because one the authorities start spinning their lies
I haven’t suggested anything about blindly believing a singular source. My point is that a video source isn’t necessary for everyone.
An element of doubt? I can think critically. Can you not? The default thought hasn’t been ‘trust the authories’ for quite a while now. Rather the opposite.
With respect, don’t tell me what I need based on what you need.
I don’t need to see a thing to have an emotional reaction to it. I am not a child lacking object permanence.
Being able to watch a dozen different angles of a person’s death in high definition isn’t necessary for everybody. Most murders have no footage, and empathy can still be experienced for them. Surely you also run the emotional gambit when you read of a school shooting, whether or not there is footage of the carnage, don’t you?
I disagree about everyone having to watch it.
I am capable of believing you, others that have seen the footage, and the reports coming out about what’s happened here. Seeing the act in full detail isn’t going to strengthen my resolve against ICE, nor make me more empathetic to this man or his family.
This is all barbaric, and while I similarly don’t think it’s getting any better, I don’t have to watch a recording of the last moment of this man’s life to know he was murdered, just as you don’t have to go see his corpse in the morgue to know the same.
If you would like to stoke the flames of controversy, channel your inner Siracusa and investigate:
Enjoy the arguments. For your data, I don’t use water at all before brushing, only after to rinse the brush itself once I’m finished. I’m glad you posted this, it’s reminded me of Hypercritical and I’m due for another listen through.
That sounds like it’ll cost the shareholders a dividend, so the board votes no to that and yes to a bonus.
You don’t see why I wouldn’t ask the person in Boulder a question about the nation? I’ve been going on about it this entire thread. My point is the sample size, not the content of the survey nor its implications. National, international, local, intergalactic - it’s not relevant to my thought because the question isn’t relevant.
I was trying to show a similarity between the NYT survey and my hypothetical scenario using a population size that could serve as a common denominator, that’s why I used Boulder. Bit tricky to get the average ice cream preference in Boulder when you ask only 1 in 100,000.
Yes, you have identified the definition of ignorance - I am not a statistician nor did I look up and reference any studies on the subject of sample size (just as no one in this thread has) before I made a comment on the internet.
Consider my opinion reinvented. In fact, I now agree with @WalrusDragonOnABike@reddthat.com. If five hundred is good enough for the electoral college, it’s good enough for statistics.
I understand that. However I didn’t choose Boulder, Colorado to ask a national question - I specifically posed a question irrelevant to location because the question being asked is not important to what I was attempting to illustrate.
I chose Boulder for its population size, which is proportionally the same as what the NYT has done. If the survey were completed by 50/100,000 of voters, the sample size would be 0.0005%, which in my opinion is much better than 0.00001%.
Sure hope nothing happens to those golf courses of his.