Robert7301201

https://lemmy.world/comment/8535938

They just said that to "drive engagement".

Amtrak is a federally chartered corporation, operated and managed as a for-profit company, but with the U.S. government as its controlling shareholder. The Amtrak Board of Directors are appointed by the president of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. https://www.amtrak.com/stakeholder-faqs

I'd consider it state capitalism. A private for-profit company owns the means of production/capital but that company is government owned.

That being said though, I don't think its fair to blame Amtrak being a private company as the reason Amtrak has high prices. Amtrak is at the mercy of freight rail as Amtrak only owns 3% of the rails they operate on. They pretty much have to pay whatever the freight companies say and freight is given preference over passenger trains. Amtrak has never made a profit since its creation.

Not 100%. Amtrak's FY2022 fact sheet says that 72.6% of miles driven was on tracks owned by other railroads. That doesn't tell us how much rail they own, but they do own some of their own rail.

Not only does it mean higher prices, but worse service because they have to rely on freight companies to maintain their rails properly and preference is given to freight leading to passenger delays.

Edit: Found a better source.

Ninety-seven percent of the route-miles traveled by Amtrak trains are on tracks owned by other railroads.

I would guess because Amtrak isn't being subsidized enough. A lot of government money is spent on building and maintaining roads. If the consumer had to pay for that directly in the form of toll roads instead of through taxes then Amtrak would be much more competitive.

Am I the only one who lays a towel out on the floor in front of the shower? This thread has me thinking what I thought was standard practice might not be.

Unacceptable, he has to play The Boulder.

Here you go. https://theycantalk.com/post/667874745661915137/predicament

Easier:

(..|.)

(..|.)

.localhost is already reserved for the loopback, per RFC 2606, but I agree with you in general. A small network shouldn't have to have a $10-15/year fee to be compliant if they don't want to use a domain outside their network.

As other posters have mentioned, .lan .home .corp and such are so widely used that ICANN can't even sell them without causing a technical nightmare.

Yes, you're right, RFC 6762 proposes reserving .local for mDNS. I was not aware of this until you brought it up, hence the dangers of using using TLDs not specifically designated for internal use.

I believe he was wearing pants like someone who has to perform a depantsing skit in a play.

Very few as this ruling would reserve .internal for local DNS only and forbid it at the global level. This is ICANN's solution to people picking random .lan .local .internal for internal uses. You'll be able to safely use .internal and it will never resolve to an address outside your network.