They recently started releasing viewing data for all shows in six months intervals.
https://about.netflix.com/en/news/what-we-watched-a-netflix-engagement-report
That sounds like the report for the first half of 2023, but also has a link to the second half.
Their exact criteria will probably change depending on a number of factors, but one could look up figures for a cancelled show to get some idea of what isn’t good enough.
They took out the “report spam” button. Presumably that’s because Google’s whole business model in 2024 is delivering spam in all its various forms.
People are weird about gasoline. They’ll drive around looking for the cheapest option, to save 2 cents/gallon. Even with a huge tank, that’s less than 50 cents of total savings.
So a grocery store can offer, say, 10¢ savings, and it only actually costs them like $1.50-$2.00 per customer. That’s way less than other sales that are harder to advertise and don’t bring in the same amount of business.
Ultimately the psychological benefit for the shopper is more than the financial cost to the store. The others societal costs don’t come in to that equation.
Reminds me of one class I had in high school right after lunch. The teacher was occasionally late getting back to class from the bar.
Backing this up with some history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_version_history
In March 2011, Mozilla presented plans to switch to a faster 16-week development cycle, similar to Google Chrome.
Firefox 1.0 was in 2004, and it took until March 2011 to get to version 4.0. Then by the end of 2011, they were on version 9.
That was a very long way to say electric boats are bad because they’re preferable to sharks.
Not sure why NA is being singled out here. Bottles are largely the same shape (with a few functional differences, see below) no matter where they come from.
The round shape is mostly a historical artifact from early designs that were hand-blown. A hexagonal (bestagons!) shape would pack better in an infinitely large container, but since most shipping crates are rectangular, there will be wasted space either way, and round is far easier and cheaper to mass-produce. Also, as a carbonated beverage, sharper corners could create stress points and exploding bottles.
Toppling over could potentially be reduced with a wider base, but fitting in the hand is a hugely important factor for any drinking container. There are larger-based bottles, but they also need more specialized packaging and storage space. By using bottles that are similar size to aluminum cans, lots of infrastructure can be dual-purpose (I’m thinking of things like can/bottle storage in your refrigerator, for example).
Double the volume of what? Glass bottles have to be thicker than other materials, so to get the same volume as a can with the same size base, it has to be taller.
If you want to do a lot more reading, here’s a few sources I borrowed from:
https://sha.org/bottle/beer.htm
Regarding the functional design features referenced above:
https://www.hillebrandgori.com/media/publication/beer-bottle-sizes-and-their-surprising-history
Those ‘shoulders’ we keep mentioning remain in modern beer bottle design mainly for aesthetic reasons. Their original function was to provide a handy place for the yeast residue and dregs to collect, so that these didn’t pour out into the glass with the beer. Nowadays, most beer is filtered, so this design feature is no longer needed. Unless you’re bottling a yeast beer like a Belgian beer, of course.
“Corrupt” would almost certainly be a statement of opinion, so not actionable in the US. A lot more detail would be necessary for this to be defamation.
“Judge XXXX has taken millions in shadow bribes and has consistently ruled for the wishes of his/her benefactors. There has been a history of being reversed on appeal proving their bias. Also I watched them kick a puppy.”
Then, obviously, these things would have to be false. Even then, the bar is pretty high. There are exceptions both ways on this, but as a general guideline, if the public knows a person’s name (judge in a high profile case, for example) they are probably classified as a public figure. The rule there is one of “actual malice” which isn’t exactly what it sounds like, but it’s the highest bar for defamation cases.
The speaker would have to say something factually false, knowingly or with no regard for the truth. Giuliani, for one recent example, was found guilty of defaming the Georgia election workers, because he went into great detail about his false claims, and he was told repeatedly that thise claims were false, but he kept going.
They auto-promote anyone with a blue check, which are disproportionately elon stans, which are increasingly nazis.
The Russian troll farms are active on Xitter.
The algorithm likes engagement. The actual nazis, the trolls, and the useful idiots are only feeding each other since that’s a huge portion of accounts left on that site.