If I may, people write (with pens) slower than than can speak, and thus to take good notes you need to synthesize the material you are being explained. You need to understand what you're writing.
Many people can type as fast/faster than they talk, and when typing it is possible to try and type verbatim what is being said. In this case, there is no understanding. (If you've ever taken a class not all that is said is pertinent and not all that is pertinent is said)
I personally don't revisit my written notes their purpose is uniquely for me to remember/understand what I've written.
I highly doubt this is unique. Some teachers (at least when I was in school) said stuff, repeated it, no problem writing it verbatim. Some others put it on the board for you to copy it verbatim, and later in uni.. most people definitely did not type fast enough to capture every word.
Writing down stuff has always been what you make of it.
Just because there arepeople who type slow doesnt invalidate the point that typing has a much higher speed ceiling. It's like saying well cars can go slower than some people who walk. So we may as well walk everywhere.
Wow, if that's actually the intent then that's _deeply_ disrespectful to the tens of thousands of original Americans who died in our revolutionary war.
> There is a headphone jack, but it's on the top of the phone.
They say that like it is a bad thing. I've always preferred the headset jack on the top because if I'm using the device while sitting and the jack is on the bottom it interferes with resting my phone holding hand the table if I'm at my desk or on my chest or leg if I'm the couch.
The main argument I've heard for jack on the bottom is that most people normally put their phone in their pocket with the top down, so if the jack is on top you have to flip it.
Google is telling me that jack on top was the norm in the early days of smartphones but gradually changed as the pocket argument won out.
Of course this wouldn't matter at all if more phones rotated the screens so that the display was upright even if the phone is upside down. Then everyone could have the headphone jack where they want.
I think it's about when you put your phone in your pocket, you have to have it top-up while most people put it top-down, shortening the lenght of the cable and pushing against the connector. In that optic top jack is worse, I believe
They went instead with "Assembled in the USA" printed on the box, which means that the phone was put in its box in Florida.
"Official" MAGA hats now say "Made in PRC" as if their wearers are too stupid to realize that means People's Republic of China, after the backlash against "Made in China". It's not a bad bet, actually: a media outlet back in the day polled a bunch of Republican voters and asked "If the government were to introduce, instead of Obamacare, some form of Affordable Care Act, would you be opposed?"
(And the number one Google query on the last election day? "Did Biden drop out?")
There have been quite a few punctuations proposed for indicating sarcasm, but interrobang not one of them - that (‽) is literally a combined ? and !, and is (per wikipedia) for "a question in an excited manner, expresses excitement, disbelief, or confusion in the form of a question, or asks a rhetorical question".
This page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_punctuation - has sarcasm ones (but I don't think any are as well known as the interrobang, which itself isn't exactly universally used... though personally I'm weird enough to have a keyboard shortcut to type it on my phone)
The "/s" is just punctuation, same as "!" or "?" or even ".", which was a radical suggestion at one point. Punctuation isn't bad, it's not necessarily good either, but it is often useful. It should be judged based on whether it improves the ability to communicate via the written word by encoding nuance that would have been expressed verbally.
And A Modest Proposal isn't comedy, it's also not sarcasm, it's satire. Modern satirists may have confused themselves into thinking that the point of satire is to be subtle, but this is a disastrous idea. Satire is political commentary, it's supposed to be so over-the-top and starkly obvious in its intent that it cannot possibly be misconstrued as accidentally arguing in favor of what it's trying to argue against. This is why, for example, Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers is bad satire: if someone has to ask "is this satire?", or someone has to helpfully point out that something is intended to be satire, then it's bad satire by definition.
/s is not punctuation, it's an explanation. And explaining the joke kills it, and also insults the audience. Sometimes the ambiguity of a statement is itself powerful, as it reveals how one side can wholeheartedly believe something the other finds absurd.
One should only use /s if the comment is really so devoid of absurdity that it can be misinterpreted.
GOOD: Trump has done a lot of good for Americans /s
BAD: Trump is the greatest human ever born and is entitled to prima nocta with all brides /s
Re: sarcasm vs satire. You're mostly arguing the dictionary. The /s "sarcasm" markup is used when satirizing some POV, not just strictly for sarcasm.
... because the entire point of VTOL (which is what the parent commentary was about) is that you can take off and land vertically and therefore don't need one of a few, scarce, super-long runways? ... and the waiting you're talking about is entirely because of those?
On top of that, small VTOL craft that can hover and would be at lower speeds closer in (esp. autonomously flown) would just need less mutual clearance compared to jets, which also have an altitude band they have to stay in, as well as no ability to slow to a crawl and coordinate finely.
You asked me why the problem of circling waiting for your turn would vanish when using VTOL aircraft. I don't know how to respond to that with anything other than, "That's the entire point of VTOL. It doesn't need one of those scarce runways that planes circle waiting for.".
My bad! You do list that you're an aeronautics person. I would genuinely genuinely love to understand what I'm missing – I'm sure there's some context here that I'm lacking!
If you want many things to land approximately at the same time and place, you need a little bit of play to schedule the arrivals/departures and ensure that you don't have collisions. There is a limit to the amount of aircraft you can safely cram in any amount of space.
Any aircraft you imagine will circle at landing and possibly loiter for minutes while waiting for their turn at using the airspace. (Edit0:See helicopters)
Building an open skyscraper for aircraft to land on will not save you since crafts will lockdown a large part of the building to land/depart safely. And it's not clear to me that it would be profitable.
Then many other problems about energy density and aircraft weight limiting the whole scope of who would possibly use those crafts.
Have a good one!
Edit1: I don't know for you, but my city doesn't have enough parking for cars. I'd be surprised if there were enough parking for EVTOL everywhere - you could very well need to loiter waiting for a spot to open, could need emergency landing if you run out of power, many many un-perfect things that make the card castle fall apart
And if productivity does increase, how are we supposed to force the recipients of this productivity to care about the rest of us? It's not like investment has panned out with its promises of general return in any of our lifetimes
Many people can type as fast/faster than they talk, and when typing it is possible to try and type verbatim what is being said. In this case, there is no understanding. (If you've ever taken a class not all that is said is pertinent and not all that is pertinent is said)
I personally don't revisit my written notes their purpose is uniquely for me to remember/understand what I've written.
reply