That’s hard for me to wrap my head around. I have friends who want a second kid but worry about whether they could still pay their mortgage and buy food. No wealthy family is worrying about that. The cost of raising a kid might go up with income, but probably not at the same slope as income, which would mean they get cheaper in relative terms.
My attempt to explain would be a high income family aim to provide their kids the same opportunity, and they know with seven children they won’t be able to provide the personal attention to provide that. For example, consider how parental involvement in a child’s schooling is the number one predictor of educational outcome. Well, you can’t spend thirty minutes each night helping each of seven kids with their homework.
They are, but in a different way. They worry if they can still afford to pay the mortgage while also paying for a second daycare/preschool tuition and then later a second private school tuition.
> The cost of raising a kid might go up with income, but probably not at the same slope as income, which would mean they get cheaper in relative terms.
FAFSA allows colleges to perform perfect price discrimination, so the cost of raising a kid through college absolutely goes up with the same slope as income. When colleges know you have significant retirement savings and a high income, your kids will get zero financial aid.
In my observation kids with older siblings tend to develop faster. As in they walk at an earlier age. I guess they get fed up with watching the older kids running around and being left behind. Older kids also often act as deputy parents. So I don't think kids from large families surfer from attention deficit. I am a single dad and often struggle to keep my child attention right through the day.
You seem to be trying to model social phenomena as linear functions. That's going to fail on almost every time.
The GP is also claiming monotonic behavior. Please understand it as constrained into a "reasonable" interval that he didn't disclaim. Otherwise it certainly won't hold either.
They have 125,000 employees and 13B in revenue. TSMC, Nvidia, and AMD combined (fab, GPU, CPU) have around 88,000 employees on 710B in revenue. Intel may honestly have far more headcount than they need.
Intel also have or had a wide variety of side businesses - compute sticks and NUCs, NICs (WiFi, Ethernet, optics), datacenter SSDs, and probably other things I'm forgetting.
I've always thought there's some geopolitical chess at here. The US can't abide being completely dependent on the island of Taiwan. So if TSMC wasn't willing to do this, the US might fund an alternative. This could leave Taiwan no leverage at all.
Now, with some US based production, TSMC is still in charge, and more resilient to disruption. So it may still be a very strong move.
I am not sure if Taiwan has any real leverage. If Taiwan is destroyed or otherwise compromised by China, the US would probably seize the American branch of TSMC, force the sale of the American branch to a western company, or force TSMC America become an independent company.
Isn't that like China seizing an iPhone factory and declaring that they are going to make the next iPhone? I doubt that a TSMC US fab can function independently for very long in the case of invasion, the Taiwanese govt presumably did this calculation before signing off on it.
Reactions to active conflict have a different threshold than normal civil operations. The interests of the US are biased towards continued peace. War is inherently value destructive (even if the military industrial complex gets to sell more stuff for a bit) so a majority of the population from a multitude of perspectives would rather remain fat and happy with their circuses (sports-ball).
That balance changes, as it has since the dawn of western history times, when outside forces disrupt the regular machinations of the people. When events like Pearl Harbor, the turn of the century terrorist airplane hijackings that turned them into missiles and America's citizens into hostages to our own national security theater paranoia, or some country turning the place all of our iPhone and computer brains are fabricated in into a war zone.
> fat and happy with their circuses (sports-ball).
You are protecting your ego. The modern circus is the algorithmic feed. And we are consuming it more obsessively then any previous form of entertainment.
It’s looking really bad for Taiwan to be honest and I don’t think the US has the political will to face off a full on invasion of China against Taiwan. Our military could handle it, but I don’t think the public will is there. I don’t think that China will come away with much other than more land though, the Taiwanese will not hand over their factories and IP to CCP companies, they will blow them up.
Any conflict would leave the small island looking like Gaza, a pyrrhic victory for everyone involved -- if you're trying to seize more than land. It's conceivable that the country making islands in the SCS would see a mere land grab as a win, doubly so if they can weather the global hit to chip production better than their rivals. It's untenable for the US to have so many critical eggs in such a vulnerable basket.
Espresso is a weird animal. In my experience, there’s basically “good espresso” and “bad espresso”. The fancy equipment mostly helps you make the good kind more frequently.
Experts can critique your cup, but hitting the sweet spot of “good” feels more like 97% of the output. If anything, the Pareto principle applies instead to the frequency of “good” extraction.
That’s about right. Sometimes my machine makes a great cup and I have no idea what I did that day. Sometimes my cream froths almost instantly, others it barely froths. No discernible difference in steps. Maybe it’s related to horoscopes.
It’s not even about terribly special moments. Stitched together, those videos and Live Photos of even small moments help me remember what they were like then.
The voice assistants are too basic. As folks have said before, nobody trusts Alexa to place orders. But if Alexa was as competent as an intelligent & capable human secretary, you would never interact with Amazon.com again.
Would you not, though? Don't the large majority of people, and dare I say probably literally everyone who buys something off Amazon first check the actual listing before buying anything?
I wouldn't trust any kind of AI bot regardless of intelligence or usefulness to buy toilet paper blindly, yet alone something like a hard drive or whatever.
You're a paramedic, so you have more training than I do. I was always taught CPR is a form of life support, and you have around three minutes from the time of arrest to begin CPR to prevent brain damage from hypoxia. So, why would seconds not matter for initiating CPR?
Perhaps this is because, as a paramedic on an ambulance, you're simply never on scene within three minutes? (As compared to a bystander)
So a couple of things, in order: every minute from arrest that no CPR is being done, chances of survival decrease by about 10%. If bystander compression-only CPR has been started, there's about 8 minutes supply of sufficiently oxygenated blood (and while compressions aren't ventilations, they do still encourage some small oxygen exchange). Even when we arrive, gaining advanced airway access or ventilation comes secondary to compressions (our county gives a limited window of 10-15 seconds to pause compressions to intubate, but with Glidescopes it's often possible to intubate through compressions).
4WD mechanically interlocks the front and rear wheels (setting aside the front and rear differentials). You cannot use 4WD on clean pavement because of this; the front and rear may need to turn at different rates which 4WD doesn’t allow. It’s ok off road because the wheels can slip a little in the dirt.
AWD generally does not mechanically 1:1 interlock anything, instead using things like torque converters. This allows it to be used on clean pavement. It isn’t as robust as 4WD, and has to respond to wheel slip instead of simply being 1:1 all the time.
My attempt to explain would be a high income family aim to provide their kids the same opportunity, and they know with seven children they won’t be able to provide the personal attention to provide that. For example, consider how parental involvement in a child’s schooling is the number one predictor of educational outcome. Well, you can’t spend thirty minutes each night helping each of seven kids with their homework.
reply