Doesn’t that ultimately punish not the company, but anyone who lent money or sold material to the company? Usually assets would be liquidated to pay off creditors but if all the assets go to employees creditors don’t get paid. This really hurts all the small businesses who sold supplies or materials to the company and haven’t been paid for them yet.

And of course, this all ignores the fact that for most companies most of their valuation is in their intellectual property, mainly their brand identity and recognition. And for manufacturing company’s, even most of the tangible assets are going to be things like factory buildings and equipment. Those things are all highly specialized so it’s very difficult to get someone else to come in and use that space to the same level of productivity. That will result in major damage to the local economy when a huge source of tax revenue and jobs suddenly disappears.

I’m not saying all this because I think companies should get away with whatever they want. Not at all. I just want to give some context for why these “obvious solutions” aren’t being used. It’s not that the entire world is in some conspiracy. Many of these problems are legitimately very difficult to solve.

where is the money going to come from if they can’t sell anything?

They could be, and probably should be repurposed

But also, brand new chrome books are ~$80

By the time you collect, clean, repair, and reimage the older computers, it may well be cheaper to just buy Chromebooks.

I hate seeing anything useful going to the trash but the economics aren’t great in this case

You know that’s not actually going to happen though. Maybe one in a hundred will get intercepted and saved at best.

I think there’s some ability to distinguish as anything intentionally discarded due to spillage or damage should be accounted for directly, as opposed to only showing up at inventory

Obviously it is impossible to separate out honest mistakes, intentional theft, and disgruntled employee semi-intentional shrink. If you ask the company, 500% of shrink is theft by organized crime rings and the general public should definitely be spending taxpayer dollars on police enforcement and jail time for pretty thieves. So I would assume most of it is actually accidental check out mistakes and employees “accidentally” checking things out wrong.

Indeed. It would be interesting to run the same analysis for censorship of pro Israel content and compare the differences between the two, though the data would likely still be noisy and inconclusive.

The only thing I miss it for is plugging into the car. I’ve got Bluetooth adapters now though that work pretty well. In theory I might run into a situation where it would be nice to be able to plug into a speaker or someone else’s car or something, but BT is so common it doesn’t really come up.

I built a 4x5 dactyl manuform and use it for coding. I will definitely be going with a bigger layout for whatever I do next. The really small layouts are amazing for prose, but for code that makes heavy use of unusual punctuation, it’s not ideal. Layers are great and I really prefer having numbers on a layer, for example, but then for something like typing a version number I have to switch layers every other character. It would be great to have enough keys to have things like period and colon available on multiple layers.

What’s your workflow that merging into other people’s WIP is normal? I’m so confused

I like this. Like a digital equivalent to how a car’s VIN is stamped on a bunch of different parts all over the car so a different buyer can tell if it’s been wrecked and repaired.

There are a lot of good arguments for wind, and I’m not arguing against it, but density and consistency are well known issues. You absolutely cannot replace a nuclear plant with a wind farm of the same size and get the same output. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, wind farms can often coexist with other land uses, but that’s still a disruptive environment.

It’s good to put pressure on nuclear, the reason it’s so incredibly safe is because it’s highly regulated, but to completely ignore it is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The question isn’t “are nuclear plants perfectly safe”, the question is “will adding nuclear plants to our energy portfolio reduce the risks from climate change enough to offset the risks they introduce.”

I think, in that framework, replacing existing coal power plants with modern nuclear reactors is a huge overall benefit.

Wind and solar are great but there’s still a lot of work needed on storage and transmission before they can be viable grid scale. Realistically, saying no to nuclear doesn’t mean more wind, it means more natural gas. And those LNG tankers really are floating bombs.

Almost anything has the potential to negatively affect tens of thousands of people when it’s managed as recklessly and negligently as Chernobyl.

Chernobyl was less a reactor and more a bomb with a very long fuse. Saying we shouldn’t build nuclear reactors today is like saying you shouldn’t take a modern cruise because 14th century sailing ships sank all the time.

Obviously building one wind turbine is less disruptive, but you need hundreds to get the same output, and they only work when it’s windy.

Those wind turbines and solar panels also get constructed, and affect a much larger area. It’s not an obvious comparison

And a dam failure isn’t that much better than a nuclear accident, and far more common and less regulated

That list records 8 fatalities related to nuclear power in the US. All time.

Coal is responsible for more than 40. Per year. Just in my city.