It's common in states that have a lower population center, geographically. I'm in Minnesota, and our Twin Cities are in the southern third of the state.

"Going up north (to the cabin)" is our spin on "upstate", because (for most people) there isn't much of a reason to go much more north than we already do.

The IPO announcement w/ shares being offered to Reddit users. Also, the deal with AI training off of user data without consent. Hard to keep track these days lol.

Tenets breaking rules and being shitty mean that landlords lose on their investments (which inherently carry risk).

Landlords breaking rules and being shitty means that people go homeless, live in awful conditions, or cannot afford basic necessities.

Sure, both sides have the capacity to be bad, but trying to "both sides" basic shelter is fucking wild.

No, they just need to be kept in that context. We trusted science on chlorofluorocarbons impacting the ozone layer, and chose to fix it rather than let it keep going. Was the projection "wrong" because CFCs were regulated, or did we just interact with it in a practical way?

The same applies here. There's a population issue that (as you mentioned in another comment) without other factors, will come into effect. China can fix it, or let things play out and see if the "unknowns" can fix it for them.

"AI isn't good enough to replace workers yet, but it's good enough to convince CEOs it can."

2001 + 19 = 2020. Typos can be overcome using context clues.

"That's your problem" is a terrible way to get people to support policy. These are real, valid concerns that many people simply can't deal with without other systems in place that currently don't exist.

This type of "fuck any gradual change, revolution now" is just armchair anarchy pushed by kids who don't face financial pressure.

(not sure if that was sarcastic)

If it truly ever got to that point, then yes, things like spot check audits to act as a deterrent could make sense. But when our current system penalizes a community for abusing a privilege they don't even have, it's hard to look at the huge and unnecessary costs and say "we're making the most out of our tax dollars."

I'm even more infuriated that AI as a term is being thrown into every single product or service released in the past few months as a marketing buzzword. It's so overused that formerly fun conversations about chess engines and video game enemy behavior have been put on the same pedestal as CyberDook™, the toilet that "uses AI" (just send pics of your ass to an insecure server in Indiana).

Washing clothes by hand is so ass that some Amish communities allow machines lmao

Yeah bro let me just

get a new car during a time of rising car prices and cost-of-living expenses

while also

not being able to sell my car for a good price for both economic and moral reasons. No one wants to buy an easily-stealable car, and no one should SELL an easily-stealable car.

Lots of tech companies saw huge growth during covid thanks to everyone having extra money to spend (see crypto and NFTs if you want clear examples that we just had too much laying around).

Many of these companies then saw their revenue and userbase increase month-after-month and thought the growth was going to continue forever (or, more cynically, they knew it was going to crash but acted like it was going to continue). This led to a bunch of hires to "drive growth."

But obviously, pandemic spending habits have mostly stopped, and the money faucet is being turned off. Companies can't afford all the workers they hired, so they're "let go due to market downturns."

TL;DR Companies either thought they were going to have unrealistic growth and made dumb hiring decisions, or knew the growth was going to end and thus made cruel hiring decisions.