Exactly, I don't know how big that place was in modern context, but from what my mom said the home had doors on opposite sides of the city block and upwards of 20 people lived there from ages 1-90.

The key term is delayed adolescence. Having a 19 year old that has a job, does their own laundry, pays their own bills, etc is different from someone who is still on mom and dad's insurance and phone plans, not paying rent, and not buying groceries.

As an example, at 25 I was working full time and my boss was 10 years older than me. My car insurance went up and I was complaining about it to my boss. Overall he didn't think it was a big deal, but the next day he came in and told me that our conversation had got him thinking. Turns out his parents were still paying for his phone bill and car insurance. A 35 year old man living on his own and his parents were still paying his fucking bills and, icing on the cake, he wasn't aware of it.

My mother's family was similar to this a few generations ago, 4-5 generations used to live in one house in Midwest USA. Their home spread from one city block to another. That said, I cannot imagine living in a <2500 sqft home with my parents and my significant other. My SO would go Thunderdome on my Mom and my dad would be freaking out on the sidelines.

I have a coworker who is engaged, he lives at his parent's place and his fiance lives at her parents place. As someone who lived without my parents (even if it meant having roommates) since 18, I cannot at all understand long term living with parents.

Communal family living was a thing in the past because modesty, temperance, and christian values were expected norms. If you want to be a puritan, or don't have familial shame, then do whatever you want. For me, I'm gonna have my privacy and peace.

PS: My coworker can't spend the night with his fiance because her parents are mega religious. He can either sleep on the couch or go to his parent's place. Likewise, his parent's won't let her stay overnight at all because they aren't married.

Maybe but it could crash anyways. JP Morgan tried to stabilize the stock market in 1929 by buying up stocks, but it collapsed anyways and led to the Great Depression.

What do you mean by small and I think context of where you live matters.

Around me there are an abundance of 0.75k-1.5k sqft homes, typically they are older (1940-1980), and they are between $180-250k. They aren't in high demand because they are older, they may need some TLC, they have old styles, they are 45 min - 1 hour drive from the big city, and they may not be as big as people want.

I have coworkers who lament not being able to buy a house, but when you talk to them they are looking at 2500+ sqft, less than 10 years old, 20 min from downtown, but $425k.

EDIT: After typing this I opened Zillow and within 30 seconds found a house across town that's 980 sqft, $115k, 1950's, but you're gonna have a 45 minute (minimum) commute every day unless you leave for work at 5 am.

EDIT 2: Oh and 0.34 acres with no HOA

I think there are more factors at play than you're giving credit. For example, Germany has an average cost of 3000-5000 euro per m^3 which translates to ~$320-540/sqft. In the US the average cost of a house is ~$146/sqft in the south, ~$156/sqft in the midwest, ~$220/sqft in the north, and ~$195/sqft in the west. So while the 8x vs 4x comparison is accurate, you're probably also getting 50% less house in Germany.

A few years ago I saw an article that Gen Z struggled with file organization. In basic terms, search functions have gotten so good that the majority of Gen Z doesn't use file organization on computers or phones. When in a work setting they are confused when digital items need to be organized into a file structure. Part of the problem is that most of them have never had to use a real world filing system. Part of the problem is that they are only used to handling their own disorganized files. In a business setting it generally isn't acceptable to dump all your files into a local "Downloads" file and rely on the search function to locate mission critical files.

When the article I am referencing came out other people stated that they had experienced similar phenomena in the PC world. They remembered when soldering was an expected norm of PC building, but with the passage of time it was no longer necessary or expected.

I hope for Canada's sake, and for the sake of NATO and the EU, that Canada puts on some big boy pants and boosts its military. I have seen a lot of talk such as yours, but the reality is that Canada's military is a joke. Canada is so far behind in it's military spending obligation for NATO that they don't even have a timeline for catching up. Canada's airforce is 1/3rd the size of France's and France is the 10th largest Airforce in the world. The Canadian Army only has 22,000 active troops while the entire Canadian Armed Forces is only around 68,000 strong.

Canada has had troops on the ground for a lot of global military events, but they've almost never fielded a significant number. In the Gulf War they had ~4,500 troops, the Coalition had >950,000 troops and 700,000 of them were from the US. In the War in Afghanistan Canada had ~40,000 troops over 13 years (Operation Enduring Freedom) and at any one point had no more than 2,500 troops deployed. Meanwhile the US had 1.9 million deployed in the same period and at it's peak had over 100,000 troops deployed at once.

Oh but we gotta talk about WW1 and WW2 because people always take it there. In WW1 Canada deployed 620,000 troops while the US deployed 4.7 million. In WW2 the Allied Powers had a combined total over over 80 million troops, the US had around 16.5 million while Canada had 1.1 million.

As an American who likes Canada and doesn't agree with the current US political direction, I absolutely hope Canada puts it's money where it's mouth is. When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 NATO members were supposed to increase their spending to prepare to stand up to Russia and as of 2021 only 5 of the 31 states had met that goal. As of 2024 only 8 states still had not met the goal, but Canada had the special distinction of being the only member state with no timeline on when they would meet that goal.

In a Politico article from last year

“The Canadian public doesn’t really see the need,” said Philippe Lagassé, Barton chair at Canada’s Carleton University. “If forced to choose between defense spending, social programs or reducing taxes, defense would always come last. So there’s no political gain to meeting the pledge.”

With the US threatening to leave NATO the EU has stepped up with a rearmament plan as recently as this week, let's hope Canada does the same.

Remember the time BLM protesters disrupted Bernie's primary rally in 2015?

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/black-lives-matter-protesters-shut-down-bernie-sanders-rally/

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot

And just categorically saying any alternative must be just as bad is just a non-sequitur, there’s no reason that should be true. Cookware is a good example, cast iron works just as well, is not as bad, the only downside compared to teflon is weight. But it’s not like sending us back to the stone age or anything…

You can have your own opinion here, but anything which performs like PFAS compounds, in the variety of uses that PFAS is used, will almost certainly be bad. In general when you make new compounds and materials which are more complex their potential health impacts are worse. PFAS is already an extremely complex material and while broad sweeping statements might not be 100% accurate, I wouldn't bet that it's replacement would be better for people.

It's another thing altogether if you are recommending going backward in the development chain, cookware is a good example here but it's limited case underlies the ubiquity of PFAS. Hell, PFAS is a major component in computer part manufacturing and is part of the reason computing technology has progressed as it has.

Um, no it doesn't.... maybe you're confusing micrograms for nanograms?

I don't have a lot of thoughts on the matter, I know a good bit about PFAS, not microplastics. Grams vs Nanograms is a huge difference, but I don't know if that's detrimental or not. Looking over the link you provided the study provides it's own description of limitations which may or may not be trivial.

You can't have it needed in some stuff and critically dangerous if it's a bio-accumulating chemical that virtually never breaks down. To reduce it enough to not be a hazard world wide you would functionally have to stop using it everywhere.

I haven't seen any definitive results on dangerous health levels, 4.4 ng/kg might be it, but then other studies show people with mg/L of blood concentration. Overall the effects of exposure seem to depend on more than just the concentration, such as health status, exposure duration, magnitude of exposure, and how lucky you got with the genetic lottery. Even then we are fairly certain it is bad, we just don't know what or how specifically. I would also throw caution at any study using ng as a serious measurement here, especially over prolonged exposure. The problem with measuring on such a low level is that you have far too much uncertainty to claim any true accuracy, at best these studies are guessing when they throw out numbers. Hell, the EPA just came out with a standardized method for analyzing PFAS last year.

At those levels of exposure you're probably getting it just from eating commercially grown fruits and vegetables, because it can bio-accumulate in those as well.

In reality no one can say for certain, but a lot of research is pointing to long term exposure being bad. The problem is that the research to determine how bad will take decades (and has been going on for decades at this point). Right now it's being used as the boogeyman for every sort of ill from causing cancer, infertility, issues with lactation, liver failure, high cholesterol, thyroid disease, and auto-immune disorders. Basically the preliminary research says that it at least in part impacts all of these things, we just don't know how much.

On the flip side bacon also causes cancer and high cholesterol at some level. That's not to make light of the situation, but it does give some credence to your earlier statement.

The thing people are missing in these discussions is what are they willing to live without if we don't use these chemicals. Going without non-stick cookware is literally the tip of the iceberg. How do we feel about cars, furniture, and mattresses being more flammable because they don't have the fire retarding forever chemicals? How do we feel about stain resistance, oil resistance, water resistance, and slip resistance in everything including shoes, umbrellas, clothes, oven mitts, jackets, and more? How do we feel about needing to clean everything including clothes, appliances, and floors more often. How about in industry where it's used as a fume suppressant so smelly chemicals don't waft as far or fire fighting foams the next time an electric car catches on fire? This stuff is even in the wrapping of your food so the it doesn't go through the packaging and cause a mess as easily.

Dupont coined the phrase "Better Living Through Chemistry" and that chemistry is PFAS. It's in your clothes when you buy them, it's in your detergent when you clean them, it's in the cleaner that you wipe your washer off with, it's in the floor sealant of the laundry room that washer is in, it's in the gloves you wear while cleaning that laundry room, it's in the carpet in the room next to the laundry room, and the list goes on and on.

Dropping PFAS chemicals fully would probably send us back to the 1960's or we'll end up replacing it with something just as bad that we don't know the effects of yet.

Yo, we're in Trump land now, Fascism already won my dudes. Biden is just seeing the writing on the wall and adapting to the change. Trump already pardoned Jared Kushner's criminal dad, so why not pardon your own son now? The game is changed and if you're still holding on to ethical ideals you're a fool. At the very least Biden is making sure they can't chase his son as part of a witch hunt next year.

People voted for Trump or failed to turn out for Kamila, either way everyone now needs to get used to the new norm.

EDIT: The irony of blasting Biden for going against his word in his son's best interest while Trump is about to become president is the most laughable hypocrisy I've ever seen. If this group is actually just a bunch of super leftist and not foreign manipulation then I look forward to watching y'all eat crow as Israel wipes out Palestine, the US leaves NATO, and western democracy collapses.

From the mind behind the design of the Cybertruck and naming his website X. God that's going to be some grade A cringe.

Omg you are a legend!

Oh wow, that cheating bit is interesting and something I would not have thought of. The games I play are prominently online, do you know if this is an issue with them?

I'm preparing for a new computer build and I have some questions. I'm feeling really scorned by Windows 11 and its incompatibility with my current hardware as well as the overall sense of that my privacy is being invaded. I'm not super familiar with linux, but I have messed around with various distros.

The build I'm planning to put together will likely use an AMD processor, but I'm uncertain about the GPU (definitely AMD or Nvidia). With my current build, RX 480 and i5-6500 I have found that in recent years I get massive artifacts in relatively old games such as Planetside 2 and Path of Exile (I also play Magic Arena quite a bit, but haven't experienced any issues there). I even get screen tearing when watching youtube or amazon prime. It's possible that my card is just dying, but considering that I don't consistently see these issues across multiple applications I feel like it might be a driver issue.

I'd really like feedback and to know more about Linux gaming (especially with the games mentioned) as well as experience with AMD, Nvidia, and Intel hardware.

Thanks to anyone who responds.

You might be right that it is an implicit threat and as a threat it constitutes verbal assault, but you'd have a hard time making any real headway in court with that, especially in a he said/she said situation. It might be a crime, but it's one which will see almost no prosecution.