I know this is probably googleable but I swear it was like strength of a man sized spider and like could lift a car. Also haven’t seen a spider man movie in a long time so could be wrong

Doesn’t he have super human strength which would require superhuman tendons and bones

If they are going to be in a car lane and treated as a car they should have at least some form of regulation. If they are going to be in a bike lane then they should conform to bike standards

The average rider isnt able to go 25mph on flat ground. A brand new rider who just purchased a new bike and has no prior experience with proper bike etiquette will find it basically impossible to go 25mph without a decent hill.

Which is just a long way of saying that cutting off a motor at 20 mph isnt a crazy concept. In Europe it’s common to have a top speed of 20-25kmh or 12-15 mph as that is a more typical speed of an inexperienced cyclist in a city environment

How does it work? Is it an upper, downer, hallucinogenic, dissociative?

It’s not a livable space…

Still think the ones with 8lb motors in them are a complete waste and can fail too easily but them being flush doesn’t seem like as much of the problem as it being motorized which is the part I personally believe they should correct

I got the number from here

“Engineers say that drag reduction due to flush handles amounts to just 0.005-0.01 Cd, saving about 0.6 kWh per 100 km.“

https://www.carscoops.com/2025/09/chinas-possible-ban-on-retractable-door-handles-could-have-ripple-effect/

They can be purely just physical with zero electronics where it acts like a lever so you push in with your thumb and it causes the handle on the other side to push out.

It doesn’t even need to be any harder to use than a conventional door handle.

It doesn’t really help much for aerodynamics on the micro scale where it saves around 0.6 kWh per 100 km but in the U.S. alone that correlates to around 29 tWh per year at 3 trillion miles driven per year

Saying that we should be able to do things because a CEO does is a shit argument.

We don’t need more people acting like CEOs who terribly pollute the planet…

The money that is going to the workers is fixed it is a zero sum game if they pay people more for commuting they aren’t going to just take a loss on their income.

In the case of the pilots and the flight attendants the difference is not them commuting from home but that they can be stuck waiting at an airport or even on a plane that isn’t departing that is completely out of their control. So if they normally get paid $50/hr for a 5 hour flight that under normal conditions involves 3 hours of unpaid airport time currently they would get $250 if they instead got 31/hr they would get paid the same for a normal flight but if there was a uncontrolled 2 hour delay they now get 310 instead which is 100% deserved

In the case of engineers if they have 10 engineers who have a budget of 5000/day why should the 9 that live 30 minutes away get paid $484 and the one that lives 2 hours away get paid 645 for not contributing anything extra?

Compensation should be increased! Work life balance should be increased! Doing it through paying commuting costs for office workers is a dumb way of doing it.

All your reasons for it are coming down to ad hominem attacks that I apparently just hate workers and I have said multiple times now that it has nothing to do with that and I want workers to be paid but the mechanism of paying them for commuting just doesn’t make logical sense

If you want to have a real conversation where you give real reasons why you think a commuting compensation is useful I would love to hear your reasons but if you are just going to keep insulting people who disagree then you can talk to yourself

I am literally not mad at the rules of the game… I am saying the rules are fine which are already codified for when your are “on the clock”

I am not opposed to changing the rules to make the game better for everyone but giving Carlos an extra 2m/ game because he lives in Wyoming when everyone else lives 5 minutes from the stadium is just bullshit.

Equity is a very important issue with uncontrolled circumstances but commuting distance is mostly in control of the employee in which case equality makes more sense

It’s literally just not a logical thing to do and the article you linked highlights exactly why it doesn’t make sense.

It encourages people to live further away from their jobs which increases commute time, increases traffic, and increases pollution

If your goal is to pay employees more then just pay them more but paying the employee who lives outside the city more because they chose to have a 2 hour commute when another coworker pays a premium to live 5 minutes from work is clearly unfair

If your goal is to have employees work less hours then just have everyone work less hours again why should some people work less than others just because they want to live far away

I think everyone should be paid more but this is the dumbest way to do it

It depends, where is your designated work site. If your main office is the one at work then being able to wfh is a privilege that if feasible should 100% be allowed but if part of your job is not able to be done remotely and once a week they require you to go the office there is no reason the company should pay for that

On the flip side if you are a remote employee who does not have a designated work site that’s asked to come to some random office to pick up a new laptop that should be on the clock.

The difference is control of the situation if you know where your designated work site is and choose to have a long commute to get there that is a personal choice, you don’t however have control over the random places that your work sends you like secondary job sites or another state.

Obviously there is no right or wrong answer to this as it’s all opinions but the way I see it is it’s bad for morale if a coworker got to work less than because they lived further away and others had to pick up their slack. Environmentally it’s worse because it encourages people to live further away and be even more car reliant.

There also are just better options.

If the goal is to reduce the total hours people have to work because 8 hours + 1 hour unpaid lunch + 1 hour of commuting eats away at people’s day then you could just lower everybody’s required work time by the average commuting time

If the goal is to pay people more you could just use the extra money you would use for paying for the commute and just pay your employees more

But you could add extra incentives like anyone who bikes/walks/takes public transit to work gets to leave extra early

As I mentioned before pay people more if they live within X distance from work so they don’t have to commute as much

Neither they are driving to work. If they were visiting a client that would be driving for work but the time you spend outside of work is not for work.

So your employer can choose where you live?

Can they also prevent you from biking to work or taking public transit since those would be slower?

If you get in an accident is the company liable since you are on the clock?

How would they check your time?

What if you were running an errand before work does time start when you get in the car or when you finish the errand?

At the end of the day it’s just easier for the company to pay you whatever money would go into the commuting budget and evenly distribute it to everyone’s salary.

Clocking in when you start your commute is a bridge too far in my opinion. If the company has no say on where you live then they could end up paying a person astronomically more just because they wanted to live far away. Like imagine an engineer who wants to live out in the mountains and commute 2 hours each way to work why should the company compensate them for that? Especially when you have another employee who is paying 2x as much in housing costs so they can live near work. Long term it would encourage people to live further from work which would just worsen traffic and suburban sprawl that nobody should want.

I would much rather see a housing incentive if a person lives with 3 miles of work so that people can have shorter commutes and the idea of walking/biking to work wasn’t unreasonable

It wasn’t a single issue vote or Congress would have just approved it.

It also didn’t break U.S. laws, it’s the bullshit emergency bypass that Trump keeps doing for everything

And then you say that Trump won’t do it unless Israel pays him but the way he is behaving makes it seem like they are considering he is taking funding from school over not crushing pro Palestine protests and is calling it anti semitism

Biden fucking sucked for the people of Gaza but it’s only gotten worse since Trump was made president

No cellular organization

11.4% take anti depressants and between 40-65% experience some degree of sexual dysfunction so even using the highest numbers and assuming that the sexual dysfunction completely eliminates interest in sex (it doesn’t) that would only be 7.41%

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db528.htm

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6007725/#%3A~%3Atext=Given+that+SSRIs+may+cause%2Ca+barrier+to+medication+adherence.

But would you advocate for trying to integrate 3D printed fasteners into bridge construction?

LLMs do actually have a lot of use, asking it to rephrase an email or report to make it more concise can save a considerable amount of time but trying to get an LLM to perform complex calculations isn’t what it’s made to do and it fails at it.

Also just to be pedantic but do you use 3D printed screws or 3D printed bolts?