CDs are annoyingly delicate to handle. Vinyl does not care about your finger tips. Vinyl sleeves are also more attractive than CD cases and easier to store on a shelf or bucket.
That's simply not true. If you scratch a vinyl record, you've introduced a defect to it. If you scratch a CD, it's probably fine. Some CD players don't like scratched CDs, but for the most part CDs are very durable.
Plus if you damage a CD, simply rip it and burn it to a CDr. (did I mention that ripping a damaged CD usually works?)
You are right about vinyl sleeves being more attractive, though. I think that's its main selling point.
You can usually polish scratches out of CDs as well.
Where they’re actually much more vulnerable is on the printed side because the data layer sits just beneath that. Still more resilient than vinyl though, unless/until they get the dreaded rot.
They can also crack if dropped but that’s just as true of vinyl, if not moreso.
There was some report in the New York Times while back that indicated that these companies staff a remote operator for every three of these cars, or something close to that, so the idea that they’re fully automated is a pretense, and the price needs to make up for the cost of remote assistance
Barefoot got me into running. It simply seemed easier and freer to run almost barefoot than in boxy shoes that everyone (falsely) assumed you needed. I did 2 marathons and many, many half marathons and 10 milers this way. Ironically I just switched to hokas, which have a barefoot feel in a very padded, spongy sole
I agree. Academic math is taught as a set of rote rules or steps. The focus is not on intuitive understanding. I was taught the usual method of long division and carrying all by rote. Only later on in my academic life did I work out on my own why it works as it does.
This hasn't been true in most of the USA for decades.
A common failure more is for students to forget something and then claim they were never taught it. Arguably the should have been taught it more thoroughly.
>Productivity in building construction has not improved much, according to data, even if tools have improved.
What data are you looking at? I worked in construction (to be fair, industrial and commercial sector) for over a decade. Productivity rates changed quite a bit during the decade I was an estimator. I will dig up my productivity books from when I first graduated and compare to the last one I purchased (a few years ago) when I get home.
>Even if tripling house size doesn’t literally triple costs, that is a straw man.
A straw man? Even if labor only accounted for 10% of the cost of building a house (it is much more), changes to labor productivity absolutely affect the cost to build. Productivity rates are different for a new build of 1000sqft and 2000sqft. Not sure how that's a straw man?
Also, just to clarify, I'm not really presenting an argument. I agree with the parent comment that these maps/analyses aren't able to capture all of the variables. They gave some variables to consider when looking at the article data. I'm giving some others.
>It certainly must account for some of the cost increase.
I said it's not a 1:1 relationship, not that size didn't account for costs at all.
Some of these are very country or group specific. “Lit” is a term used in American hip hop. “Pissed” is mainly used in Britain. “Wasted” is used by American high school and college students.
Most acclaimed or popular books are mixed. The trick is to vary the speed and depth of your reading. Read slow and enjoy the most informative parts. Skim the boring sections or chapters. A good book gives you a sense of awe and wonder that makes you look up from the page and think about what you just read. You can use that as a guide post as to whether it’s worth finishing a book. Always read a sample before buying.
