Democrats consistently support & pass RCV, while Republicans repeal & ban it. If you want RCV, you need to support Dems in the meantime.

Ok Boomer.

Lung is dumb as fuck, but can you not use ‘retarded’ as a slur in the year of our lord 2024??

Does this remind anyone else of House of Usher?

Libraries are physical media

Tell me you haven’t actually been to a library in the last 15 years without telling me.

Have you not heard of Libby? Of Overdrive? Next thing you’re gonna be telling me Libraries aren’t a solution because not everyone can use microfiche…

Can libraries not get subscriptions to news services for public access?

Libraries?

Could you explain more- so you want a la carte options, like pay on a per-article basis? And to be clear, you know that free high-quality print media has never been a thing historically, right? Like, you never could access all articles from the entire history of the NYTimes on demand for free, that was never a thing. The paper for that day was locked in a metal box you had to pay to open, and all you got to see was half the front page.

Or, you know, support libraries…

In the US on Android, unencrypted SMS messaging comes default. How do you propose getting a technologically illiterate boomer to not use SMS?

The Russian Federation actually does give a fuck about climate… They want to make global warming worse. They get to sell more gas, they get more arable land up north, and they open up shipping routes in the Arctic. Putin is Captain Planet levels of evil, fr.

Same. Don’t care what reddit does now, cause I’m not there 🤷🏼‍♂️

I know right? Makes me so mad, I used to donate to them, but removing SMS is gonna kill uptake

Signal to work for SMS again 🙄🙄🙄

With approaches to reducing emissions we should take a “yes and” approach.

UGH, YES, THANK YOU! Perfect should not be the enemy of good.

If there’s more people buying cybertrucks who don’t like them than the people who want them long-term, how would a scalping market sustain itself?

I don’t know man, I’ll believe it when I see it.

Hmm, one thing I’m not understanding is that in these scenarios it sounds like every truck made is going to a scalper, and the issue is that even with one per person, the number of scalpers equals the number of cars. But why would they get dibs? A lucky scalper can’t get first dibs and buy out the whole stock before others get a chance, because it’s 1 per person. The real question is what is the portion of scalpers vs long-term owners.

Let me know if you have better numbers, but this article from back in January suggested 10k cybertrucks to be filled in 2023. Let’s say there are 10k potential scalpers, and 1M potential long-term buyers. That doesn’t mean the 10k trucks will get scalped by the 10k scalpers, it means we would expect 100 to be (again, individually) scalped, and the other 9,900 trucks to go to long term buyers. Additionally, since those scalpers only have 1, they will be competing against each other on resale price.

Since I am talking about haters and fanboys, I would not bet that they would act rationally.

I think that’s an ok assumption, but the question is more about the number of people who would act so outrageously. It seems very odd to me that there would be so many people who hate Mush and are ok dropping $50k and have the bandwidth to resell, in such numbers that they significantly match or outnumber long-term buyers.

Interesting questions; let’s see:

what is stopping me from buying 1 cybertruck at X and resell it at 3X the next day ? And other people to do the same ?

Nothing should stop you from doing that, or at least trying. You are one person with one car, so there will be other stock available at a lower price for others to buy if they want. The problem of scalping becomes an issue when one person can buy a large portion of the product & artificially control the supply. If everyone decides to buy 1 and then resell higher, nothing is stopping consumers from also buying their 1 and getting lower prices from the manufacturer.

a scenario where a number of Musk haters will buy a cybertruck to resell it at a premium to a number of Musk fanboys just because.

Cybertrucks are a large ($50k) investment, and as a physical good that’s also regulated through the DMV, they are a lot more work to resell. So in this scenario you think there is such a large number of Mush haters with both the disposable income & free time for resale that they eat up a significant portion of supply. AND that there is such a large amount of consumers with disposable income & desire for a truck that they would support such a resale market. If that ever becomes a reality then… Good for Tesla? Those"haters" would be significantly contributing to Tesla’s profit.

Also, here is an academic paper that looks at the effectiveness of US anti-scalping laws on ticket sales, and it concludes future policies should focus on acquisition, not resale.

The majority of what you buy is by choice. Why is it ok to violate your rights as a consumer, as long as the product is expensive enough? Isn’t that the real slippery slope here? "Houses are luxury items that absolutely nobody needs- just rent an apartment. "

Imagine applying this argument to an employment contact. “Tesla’s contract says you don’t get bathroom breaks & have to work in unsafe conditions. If you don’t like it, don’t work there”. Clearly doesn’t hold water. In the US, we need stronger consumer protections - right to repair, right to be forgotten, and right to safely do what you like with your own property.

Ticket scalpers are blowing up because of collusion by Ticketmaster. Tickets are also a virtual product. Surely we can be clever enough to limit the sale of physical goods the size of cars