I can’t think of a switch you won’t ever need. I think the “sce to aux” story is a good example of when you need it you need it.

The motor could turn with the wheel. You could have a wheel-motor without the excessive unsprung weight of the motor components.

It still has corners that need to have a moving seal. This is a huge issue.

It’s pretty smart. It is like a wheel-motor but without all the unsprung weight.

They aren’t. Light ircraft now use touchscreens that you are supposed to use while bouncing around. They had a knob for a while but then it seemed touchscreens took over. With the knob you still had to look, it at least you didn’t have to aim at a bouncing spot on the screen.

Also make them illegal in aircraft! And spacecraft! Seriously stupid.

I like location based games, like Niantic has done, but with much less backstory.

I’m using Google’s VPN now. They promised they won’t look. Honestly I think a lot.more is leaked via the GBoard keyboard, but what do I know.

There are some bitter people here.

The voting mechanism enabled “the wisdom of crowds.”

But that means I have to read them all. One of the things that drew me to the other platforms was the fact that the smartest or whittiest answers came to the top.

I know there is, or was. A meth head I knew used old cell phones to watch to outside of his house. I saw the app and it worked really well. The phones were all on the same wifi and had no cell service.

Don’t the comments sort in order of popularity?

I think a bigger issue is the acceptance of logical falicies leading to arguments that are nothing more than insult wars.

I can think of several instances but one that comes to the top was a long well reasoned argument for FM on phones. The writer put a great deal of effort into it then ended it with “do you know how stupid you sound [for taking the other position].” I made the mistake of pointing this out and was met with downvotes and told it was a very reddit thing to say.

I would love to see a platform where fallacious arguments were excluded until resubmitted or at least flagged. They do not encourage reasoned discourse.

Stressful, expensive, hard working and statistically unproductive.

But the founder is expected to use capital they don’t have to fund the business until it is attractive to people with capital. They are expected to market the product without marketing experience. They are expected to negotiate with people who are negotiating from a position of strength and who has much more experience. They are expected to be personally attractive to get interest from VCs. After they have gotten traction they are expected to be “coachable” and follow the advice of advisors that up until now have not been involved in the growth of the company.

The ecosystem is broken. Founders rarely get funding and when they do they end up losing most of the business they built. VCs are getting very few positive results.

Psychiatrist prescribe drugs not psychologists.

Do you believe in unfettered free markets? Those jobs are very often to implement compliance to restrictions in the markets.

“Startup founder”

I think this could have worked if the employees being replaced owned the robots. They don’t have the capital anymore but when there was a middle class this could have been a possibility.