Welcome Notice

Register Log in

working from home...

J

Joerg

Guest
On 2020-07-31 14:54, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 22:12:08 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

On 2020-07-30 23:50, Sjouke Burry wrote:
On 30.07.20 23:39, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
On 2020-07-30 22:16, Joerg wrote:
On 2020-07-29 21:40, Joe Chisolm wrote:
[...]

ITU says 150ms one way, so called \"mouth to ear\". Cisco says that
can be pushed to a 200ms budget. Also > 30ms packet jitter can be
a problem. If you examine the video you normally see very little
movement with a conference. Some static power point slide while
people talk. Even video of people talking the back ground is very
static. Frame to frame compression can be very high, thus video
can be good but audio is poor.


Problem is, even with only 150msec it can take up to a 1/3rd of a
second (rount trip) to realize that the other guy must have started
talking at the same time. Then we both stop, both start again, stop
again, the usual. A 1/3rd of a second is a long time for audio.

Agreed! 150ms delay in a conversation is far too much. It
completely breaks the flow. I hate digital phones. I can\'t
stand video conferencing. How can people possibly tolerate
this?

Jeroen Belleman

They tolerate it, because they are unable to shrink the earth,
and/or built computers/networks which are 1000 times faster.

You have evidently never used an old analog phone. No perceptible
latency, no drop-outs, no weird distortions. But that era is well
behind us.

Jeroen Belleman

Latency? You had to call the operator to set up a long-distance call.
She\'d call back when they were ready.

The quality could be really bad.
The longest latency was near a campground in the boonies, Southern Utah
or Northern Arizona. A young German couple wanted to make a phone call
to Europe. The campground manager said to follow the singing wires until
there is a phone on a pole, to take LOTS of quarters and to watch for
rattlesnakes. Half hour walk or so. They came back sad. I asked what
happened. \"We can\'t understand the operator at all, he sounds like
having a hot potato in his mouth\". So I went with them, talked to the
operator, then once the call was connected handed over the receiver. On
the way back I asked them what their professions were. He was an English
teacher (!).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 
P

Phil Hobbs

Guest
On 2020-07-31 17:54, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 22:12:08 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

On 2020-07-30 23:50, Sjouke Burry wrote:
On 30.07.20 23:39, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
On 2020-07-30 22:16, Joerg wrote:
On 2020-07-29 21:40, Joe Chisolm wrote:
[...]

ITU says 150ms one way, so called \"mouth to ear\". Cisco says that
can be pushed to a 200ms budget. Also > 30ms packet jitter can be
a problem. If you examine the video you normally see very little
movement with a conference. Some static power point slide while
people talk. Even video of people talking the back ground is very
static. Frame to frame compression can be very high, thus video
can be good but audio is poor.


Problem is, even with only 150msec it can take up to a 1/3rd of a
second (rount trip) to realize that the other guy must have started
talking at the same time. Then we both stop, both start again, stop
again, the usual. A 1/3rd of a second is a long time for audio.

Agreed! 150ms delay in a conversation is far too much. It
completely breaks the flow. I hate digital phones. I can\'t
stand video conferencing. How can people possibly tolerate
this?

Jeroen Belleman

They tolerate it, because they are unable to shrink the earth,
and/or built computers/networks which are 1000 times faster.

You have evidently never used an old analog phone. No perceptible
latency, no drop-outs, no weird distortions. But that era is well
behind us.

Jeroen Belleman

Latency? You had to call the operator to set up a long-distance call.
She\'d call back when they were ready.

The quality could be really bad.
I remember doing that in the central post office in Rome back in 1978.
Took hours.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com
 
D

Don Y

Guest
On 7/31/2020 7:14 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Lotta typing. Do you have time to design any electronics?

Sure! Lots!

Fun. Show us some.
That\'s the goal of my next offsite: to demonstrate SYNCHRONIZED
audio -- within a few microseconds -- (and later, video) that
automagically follows you around the house as you move from room
to room; processors that come on-line as other processors (are
deliberately!) fault(ed); computational loads that physically
\"move\" from processor to processor so surplus computing capacity
can be powered down; processors that come online as computational
(or I/O) requirements increase; support for a heterogeneous mix
of processors across nodes; devices that can withstand direct
physical assaults -- as well as communication assaults; etc.

And all on dirt cheap commodity hardware (consumer market)!

You know, run-of-the-mill systems design...
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 4:30:19 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 31/07/2020 07:20, Ricketty C wrote:
On Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 11:51:00 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 30/07/2020 06:31, Ricketty C wrote:

Joe talked about 25 Mbps being ok. I have 7 Mbps max and often only see 2 or 3 Mbps.

It video gets pretty iffy when you get down to 2 or 3Mbps.

My connection is 6Mbps on a good dry summers day and degrades with rain
to about 3Mbps. Anything better than about 3.5M will support HD video
with the occassional buffering lag or sync loss in the video stream but
the audio pretty much continuously OK. On a really bad wet and windy day
it can\'t even stream high quality audio reliably.

All bets are off if there is a hard error on my local line which causes
a 1s glitch whilst lost packets are retransmitted and if they also fail
it enters exponential backoff. I get about 5 of those an hour even with
interleaving error correction enabled. My modem uptime before there is a
completely unrecoverable line error is 2-3 weeks. It gets stuck in a
state where it claims in sync but error seconds increase in realtime.

The odd one according to Murphy\'s Law lands where it can do most damage.

You might want to look at your line statistics attenuation and SNR to
see what proportion of hard and soft errors the modem is encountering.

What would I then do with that information?

You would at least know that you should be asking your ISP to check the
phone line for faults and remake any failing joints.
Really??? You think my phone line is the problem with someone else\'s transmissions that everyone on the call sees as getting corrupted? Have you been reading this thread or did you just show up and reply to this one post?


It happens to me
every couple of years when either rodents chew through insulation, trees
wear it off or corrosion leads to rectification of the ADSL signal.
My problem used to be in the central office, but no longer. I gave up my phone line. That\'s the other reason the phone line is not at fault, I use a WISP for my Internet service provider.


Of course you could choose to remain ignorant of your line quality and
suffer in silence or mutter on about it ineffectually here.

What you measure gets controlled.
Or you can remain ignorant of the details of this issue and continue to make pointless posts. I suggest your reread the thread from the beginning... at least the discussion about my use of Zoom. Right now you seem to be talking about your assumptions rather than my issue.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
G

Gerhard Hoffmann

Guest
Am 01.08.20 um 05:55 schrieb Don Y:

That depends on how you (artificially) limit the number of tests.  If
you change the testing policy (or criteria) in such a way that it
avoids uncovering infected individuals, then those 20M tests could
(improbably!) show ZERO infections.
Even worse. The patient 0 here in Germany shows 0 antibodies
after half a year. Nothing left.
That does not provide much hope for vaccination.

Gerhard
 
D

Don Y

Guest
On 8/1/2020 2:03 AM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 01.08.20 um 05:55 schrieb Don Y:

That depends on how you (artificially) limit the number of tests. If
you change the testing policy (or criteria) in such a way that it
avoids uncovering infected individuals, then those 20M tests could
(improbably!) show ZERO infections.
Even worse. The patient 0 here in Germany shows 0 antibodies
after half a year. Nothing left.
That does not provide much hope for vaccination.
Yes, lots still unknown. What\'s disturbing is even the
\"scientists\" are talking like politicians -- lots of
(carefully worded!) \"happy talk\" instead of an acknowledgement
of the LIKELY issues to come.

Does exposure grant immunity?
If so, how long?
How likely is the virus to mutate over (longer periods of) time?
How much protection against variants of the virus?
How likely for an initial vaccine to be tweeked for (annual?) variants?
What is the severity of the disease in a reinfected survivor?
How symptomatic will reinfections be? (i.e., if you escape the
severity of the disease due to earlier infection, are you
more/less likely to become a silent carrier thereafter?)
What long-term health consequences do survivors likely face?
How do these consequences vary with severity of initial infection?

There\'s going to be a frenzy of publications in the future that
try to (or accidentally!) uncover all of the yet-to-be-knowns
about this virus. I wouldn\'t be surprised if we start seeing
certain \"recommended testing\" for folks who have been (or MAY
have been) exposed to the virus, in the past.

E.g., it is now suggested that ALL \"baby boomers\" be tested for
Hepatitis C -- even those not known to be at risk for the disease.
Some bean counter undoubtedly noticed an increased frequency of
undiagnosed hep-c in that population and hence the recommendation.

<https://www.webmd.com/hepatitis/news/20120816/cdc-all-baby-boomers-get-tested-hep-c>

Fun times -- not!
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Saturday, August 1, 2020 at 5:03:43 AM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 01.08.20 um 05:55 schrieb Don Y:

That depends on how you (artificially) limit the number of tests.  If
you change the testing policy (or criteria) in such a way that it
avoids uncovering infected individuals, then those 20M tests could
(improbably!) show ZERO infections.
Even worse. The patient 0 here in Germany shows 0 antibodies
after half a year. Nothing left.
That does not provide much hope for vaccination.
Not necessarily the same thing. Vaccination works on different sites and may well produce a lasting result. We will only find out if and when the tests are completed.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
M

M Philbrook

Guest
In article <sl8uhfpje5virb2pu2hsh16cvopedp9mcg@4ax.com>,
jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com says...
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/07/27/report-googles-200000-employees-will-work-from-home-for-another-full-year/

This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.

Are many of you working from home now?
absolutely not..

We have been working at the faciltiy, interfacing with many out siders
and every one of them will tell you if asked \"How many COVID19 have you
seen?\" The answer is \"None\"

I have been tested at least 3 times now because some of those that came
to our place got a positive results for it which means everyone they
were nere needs to be monitored.

However, everyone of those got retested by another doctor (3 test) to
find that the first test was a false flag.

But regardless of the false flags, fake test pumped up agenda numbers,
these numbers don\'t go away..

We had two people tell us they went to a clinic and by the time they
left the place, they had counted them as 5 positive test claims to later
find out they didn\'t have it but the 5 counts stayed on the records and
were reported.

So you can see where this is going, the little sniffle for most,
dangerous for others that are already on the edge the cliff which most
likely anything would give them a push.

Oh yes, we have seen the sabotage machine at work..
 
J

Jim MacArthur

Guest
This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.
I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is that in three years, the change to cities will be almost unmeasurable. His two points:
1) Creative collaboration is far more efficient done face to face. As John mentioned, nothing beats a real whiteboard with two people standing in front of it. Virtual collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there yet. However, as folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all day doesn\'t involve creative collaboration, which brings us to...
2) Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love saying things like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back him up.) Young people live in cities because they\'re fun. Old people don\'t live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and live in cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data.
Now I personally don\'t believe that the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m not the urban planner. I guess we\'ll see in three years.
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Sunday, August 9, 2020 at 10:28:29 PM UTC-4, Jim MacArthur wrote:
This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.


I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is that in three years, the change to cities will be almost unmeasurable. His two points:
1) Creative collaboration is far more efficient done face to face. As John mentioned, nothing beats a real whiteboard with two people standing in front of it. Virtual collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there yet. However, as folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all day doesn\'t involve creative collaboration, which brings us to...
2) Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love saying things like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back him up.) Young people live in cities because they\'re fun. Old people don\'t live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and live in cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data.
Now I personally don\'t believe that the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m not the urban planner. I guess we\'ll see in three years.
I\'d like to see the young/old city data. I\'ve never seen any indication that people move to the city when young and move away when they are older. In fact a lot people I know (yes, anecdotal evidence) move from suburban or rural settings to urban settings when older because they want to have a simpler life closer to the things they want. Not many people want to do yard work when they are 65.

--

Rick C.

-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
D

Dean Hoffman

Guest
On 7/27/20 1:55 PM, John Larkin wrote:
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/07/27/report-googles-200000-employees-will-work-from-home-for-another-full-year/

This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.

Are many of you working from home now?
That old song \"Cats in the Cradle\" might apply to a lot less
families now. It talks of a guy who was always working and didn\'t have
time for family. His son always wanted to be just like him. The guy
retires and realizes his son did turn out just like him.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUNZMiYo_4s>
 
J

Jim MacArthur

Guest
My kid\'s not too happy this morning with my misquoting him. Sooo....

Apparently, by \"old\", he meant \"older than 35\". Wealthy retired people do indeed move back to the cities. But that only proves the point that the existence of jobs in cities is not the major draw. And by \"barely measurable\" he means a mere 20% drop in real estate prices. Since half of my net worth is in urban real estate, I\'m pretty sure I\'ll be able to measure 20% without any special equipment...
 
L

Les Cargill

Guest
Jim MacArthur wrote:
This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.


I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is
that in three years, the change to cities will be almost
unmeasurable. His two points: 1) Creative collaboration is far more
efficient done face to face. As John mentioned, nothing beats a real
whiteboard with two people standing in front of it.
That\'s largely a myth. And an urban planner would think that.

Just an anecdote - one place I worked, they had one copy of some
critical software and literally installed it in a conference room.

Spent weeks using it \"as a team\". Months maybe. What this precluded
was much if any \"proof like\" thinking about the thing. It\'s an unusual
person that can do math and talk at the same time.

If you\'re not doing math, then you\'re socializing. When people are
asked, they\'d probably just about do anything else in preference to
doing math.

Yeah, we\'re down to Blaise Pascal - \"All of humanity\'s problems stem
from man\'s inability to sit quietly in a room alone,\"

Urbanism has been a wildly successful myth over the last 20 years. But
people I know have done well shorting it.

Virtual
collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there yet. However, as
folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all day doesn\'t
involve creative collaboration,
:)

which brings us to... 2) Folks don\'t
live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love saying things
like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back him up.)
Young people live in cities because they\'re fun.
Young people in cities that I\'ve known ( massive observer bias warning )
don\'t have any fun. This is proportional to teenagers complaining
\"there\'s nothing to do.\" Again, when asked, people will say things like
this. But they may or may not actually believe it.

Old people don\'t
live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and
live in cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data.
If we\'re not the data... then who is?

Now I personally
don\'t believe that the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m
not the urban planner. I guess we\'ll see in three years.
We live by myth, but myths aren\'t indestructible.

--
Les Cargill
 
D

Don Y

Guest
On 8/9/2020 7:28 PM, Jim MacArthur wrote:
This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.


I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is that
in three years, the change to cities will be almost unmeasurable. His two
points:

1) Creative collaboration is far more efficient done face to face.
As John mentioned, nothing beats a real whiteboard with two people standing
in front of it. Virtual collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there
yet. However, as folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all
day doesn\'t involve creative collaboration, which brings us to...
How does living in a city pertain to \"creative collaboration\"?
Do you expect most folks to be \"creatively collaborating\" in their
homes? Or, if their homes are closer to work, will they spend more
late nights hanging around the watercooler, at work, instead of
returning to their homes?

2) Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love
saying things like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back
him up.) Young people live in cities because they\'re fun. Old people don\'t
live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and live in
cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data. Now I personally don\'t believe that
the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m not the urban planner. I
guess we\'ll see in three years.
I don\'t think it boils down to \"fun\".

Young people tend to have fewer \"responsibilities\" so have more time,
energy and MONEY for \"fun\" (instead of worrying about their kids\'
college funds, a mortgage payment, doctor visits, etc.) given that their
time has to be spent on SOMETHING (if not \"serious\", then \"fun\"?).

They also seem to be less eager to incur the costs associated with
an automobile (purchase, maintenance, parking, insurance, etc.).
So, rely on mass transit much more than \"olde fartes\". I\'ve not
ridden a bus or subway since college.

Walking isn\'t a \"horrendous\" transportation alternative -- as it
seems to become, with age. Esp if you\'re walking with friends!
Walking the ~1.75 miles to Harvard Square seemed to pass in no
time at all! By contrast, older, walking the length of an
indoor Mall is daunting! I\'d be much more inclined to just
\"head home\" than venture to some store at the far end of the Mall.

(The sight lines in malls are deliberately interrupted to hide
the distances involved.)

Old people aren\'t keen on house maintenance (yard work, etc.).
But, that\'s why God created checkbooks! Most folks that I
know are really resistant to move out of their suburban homes,
despite the realities of longer travel times to hospitals (and
the increased likelihood that they will NEED a shorter travel time),
etc.

When I lived in Chitown, my best friend lived near north/LSD.
We lived in the burbs. He always complained about how far
\"out in the boonies\" we were (yet I could be \"downtown\" in less
than 30 minutes). We always reciprocated by griping about how
much time we\'d spend hunting for a parking space when we went to
visit him.

The big reveal was Marital Status. Once *he* got married, the
city life lost it\'s appeal, overnight. Suddenly, *he* was
living in the boonies (even farther out than us!). The sorts
of social interactions in which he (and his wife) engaged
magically changed.
 
S

server

Guest
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 19:28:24 -0700 (PDT), Jim MacArthur
<jimbmacarthur@gmail.com> wrote:

This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.


I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is that in three years, the change to cities will be almost unmeasurable. His two points:
1) Creative collaboration is far more efficient done face to face. As John mentioned, nothing beats a real whiteboard with two people standing in front of it. Virtual collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there yet. However, as folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all day doesn\'t involve creative collaboration, which brings us to...
2) Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love saying things like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back him up.) Young people live in cities because they\'re fun. Old people don\'t live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and live in cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data.
Doesn\'t commuting misery keep people close to their jobs?

>Now I personally don\'t believe that the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m not the urban planner. I guess we\'ll see in three years.

Good thoughts. But this current crisis could trigger some collapses
that were getting ready to happen anyhow, and will have long-term
effects. I\'m referring to the next dot.com bust that is overdue, all
those over-funded over-staffed things that keep losing a billion
dollars per quarter.

Possibly half the restaurants, and 75% of silly gift stores and yoga
studios, won\'t survive. That is going to change the appeal of cities.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
D

Don Y

Guest
On 8/10/2020 7:38 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> Doesn\'t commuting misery keep people close to their jobs?

I think people live where they want to live and worry about the commute, later.
Most folks have a lot more control over their address than their employment.
(and, if you have kids, you likely consider their needs in your choice
of home). I\'ve had commutes ranging from ~2 miles to ~25 miles (ea way).
Never did I consider moving to change the length of my commute.

Possibly half the restaurants, and 75% of silly gift stores and yoga
studios, won\'t survive. That is going to change the appeal of cities.
It will change lifestyles but whether or not it changes the appeal
of cities vs. burbs is hard to judge. Almost all of the \"really good\"
restaurants, here, are located outside of \"downtown\". A big factor
in a restaurant\'s appeal (and decision as to where to locate) is
availability of parking. Having to hunt for (and feed!) a meter is
not the sort of \"fun\" most folks want to associate with dinner.

Malls will likely finish their death rattles. Even \"big\" department
stores may fade in favor of more specialized stores. Do you really need
to buy your clothes where you buy your ammunition and groceries??
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Monday, August 10, 2020 at 6:25:57 AM UTC-4, Jim MacArthur wrote:
My kid\'s not too happy this morning with my misquoting him. Sooo....

Apparently, by \"old\", he meant \"older than 35\".
That changes things tremendously, eliminating support for the premise, \"Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work\".

If moving to the city for fun only includes a 15 year span of our lives, it can\'t really dominate the statistics.


> Wealthy retired people do indeed move back to the cities. But that only proves the point that the existence of jobs in cities is not the major draw.. And by \"barely measurable\" he means a mere 20% drop in real estate prices. Since half of my net worth is in urban real estate, I\'m pretty sure I\'ll be able to measure 20% without any special equipment...

Now you seem to be swinging in the other direction, basing a claim on another small group.

Then the measurement via real estate price change of 20% seems a bit overly dramatic. Would a 10% drop in 3 years not prove a point? Would 5% not? The power supply voltage for chips is specified at ±5%, but if it has a regular variation of ±2%, I\'m going to find out why and deal with it..

The circuit can be changed very measurably without impacting the measured voltage.

I think your son the urban planner is measuring using his methods for his purposes which may not be well suited for this purpose.

--

Rick C.

-++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Monday, August 10, 2020 at 10:38:12 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 19:28:24 -0700 (PDT), Jim MacArthur
jimbmacarthur@gmail.com> wrote:


This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.


I posed this question to my kid, who\'s an urban planner. His take is that in three years, the change to cities will be almost unmeasurable. His two points:
1) Creative collaboration is far more efficient done face to face. As John mentioned, nothing beats a real whiteboard with two people standing in front of it. Virtual collaboration will get better, but it\'s not there yet.. However, as folks are discovering, quite a bit of what they do all day doesn\'t involve creative collaboration, which brings us to...
2) Folks don\'t live in cities to be closer to their work. (My kid love saying things like that, but trust me, he\'s got terabytes of data to back him up.) Young people live in cities because they\'re fun. Old people don\'t live in cities. I know, quite a few of you are old (as am I) and live in cities (as do I) but we\'re not the data.

Doesn\'t commuting misery keep people close to their jobs?

Now I personally don\'t believe that the changes will be unmeasurable, but then, I\'m not the urban planner. I guess we\'ll see in three years.

Good thoughts. But this current crisis could trigger some collapses
that were getting ready to happen anyhow, and will have long-term
effects. I\'m referring to the next dot.com bust that is overdue, all
those over-funded over-staffed things that keep losing a billion
dollars per quarter.

Possibly half the restaurants, and 75% of silly gift stores and yoga
studios, won\'t survive. That is going to change the appeal of cities.
If only half the restaurants survive that will be something of an improvement over pre-pandemic times. Restaurants have very high failure rates.

I expect yoga studios and \"silly\" gift stores are similar. But in all three cases once the pandemic has subsided to the point we all are free to go out again new businesses will open up and all will be good.

It\'s not like a yoga studio is a capital intensive venture. Even restaurants seem to pop up left and right in most virus-free areas.

No, the impact of the pandemic won\'t be measured in lost restaurants and yoga studios. It might just be measured in lost burger donuts per bald eagle except in Texas where the number would be vanishingly small.

https://www.maxpixel.net/America-Blue-Sky-Texas-Sculpture-Flags-Eagle-323382

--

Rick C.

-+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
S

server

Guest
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 22:58:48 -0500, Dean Hoffman
<dh0496@windstream.net> wrote:

On 7/27/20 1:55 PM, John Larkin wrote:


https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/07/27/report-googles-200000-employees-will-work-from-home-for-another-full-year/

This virus thing might change things, and specifically cities,
forever.

Are many of you working from home now?

That old song \"Cats in the Cradle\" might apply to a lot less
families now. It talks of a guy who was always working and didn\'t have
time for family. His son always wanted to be just like him. The guy
retires and realizes his son did turn out just like him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUNZMiYo_4s
One of the traditional responsibilities of a dad is to feed and
shelter his kids. For most people, that means working.

Passing on by example the concept \"take care of your family\" isn\'t so
bad.

It is interesting that money is a recent invention in human history,
but now it regulates everything. Pretty well, actually.





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
Toggle Sidebar

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top