RunawayFixer

I really like their pagewide xl printers, but those are purely aimed at businesses. Just to name one thing I like :D

And those xl printers are the only thing that I can think off. I won't even consider buying a current HP computer/laptop/small printer/...

This is also something that many people outside of the USA don't understand: 49% of the americans are not voting for the Trump/republican shit show that they see in their foreign media, but rather for a heavily editorialized image of the person and party.

The quotes are there because it's a common misconception that as soon you have any kind of 4g signal, you have access to a fast connection, which is not the case. So in many countries at some point they proclaim that "xx%" of the population now has access to "4g", which will be technically true, but the actual % that has access to fast 4g will be substantially lower.

Hey, thanks for taking the time to answer.

Afaik, high internet speed requires higher frequencies and high frequencies reach less far + have less penetration through/around obstacles. That's what makes providing "4g" virtually everywhere easy (good enough for phone calls at least), but if they want to provide actual high speeds everywhere, then it suddenly becomes not so easy (nor cheap).

That the USA and Canada don't provide proper high speed internet access/choice to many of their rural citizens is caused by the rent-seeking mentality of their network companies + the governments that enable this. Most of those rural citizens live in places where there are more than enough people for it to make economic sense to invest, but investing would lower short term profits, so they don't. Instead those customers are stuck with the choice between a single provider who is offering bad service, or no service at all. And as we've seen with the Boobies American, they've got enough of their dumb citizens convinced that they are oh so exceptional that this is the best that they could ever expect.

Tbh, that 4g coverage up north looks pretty damn good for how few people live there. To me it just makes no economic sense to provide that good a service there. So I'm curious and as a Finn you might know: does it make economic sense or was this investment done for other reasons?

And why are you unwilling to accept that there is a lot of nothing land in Finland? Most of Finland is a lot of nothing land, plagued by mosquitoes in the summer and darkness in the winter.

Your country is neither unique, nor exceptional in this regard.

The Finn already addressed this in their first post: 97% of the country has 4g. That is country, not people in the country. So yes, a reindeer in Lapland has a better potential internet connection than many rural north americans.

Edit: I found some recent numbers: this carrier claims to provide 4g to 99% of the population, 5g to 96%. https://www.dna.fi/wholesale/about-us/networks That 2nd statistic must be pretty damn rare, the country of Nokia indeed.

Hitler also had a 100 000 polish intelligentsia murdered as preparation for German colonization of German controlled Poland.

Authoritarians seem to believe that most people are sheep and that if you want to control those sheep, you not only have to kill the current shepherd, you also have to kill all potential future shepherds.

I'm not so sure about that, it's not like news like this makes it to right-wing voters, they are too busy consuming "alternate" facts media and being outraged about whatever they're expected to be outraged about now. And republicans need just 1 more presidential win for there never to be a non republican president ever again.

I'm tacking on this opinion article from 2020 with a few good examples/explanations of how bad stock buybacks are in the long term.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergeorgescu/2020/05/13/stock-buybacks-are-banned-let-it-be-a-trend/

Boeing and general electric are of course mentioned. The line goes up, until it doesn't. The key to being a successful CEO, seems to be, to be the one making the line go up and then gtfo before it comes crashing down.

This reads like a case of game design by spreadsheet to me. Instead of the lead designers being creative persons making creative decisions, these are accountants that are designing a game by ticking boxes. They didn't try to make a game that they would like to play, they tried to make a game that they think others would like to play.

Or in other words, it's to make sure that those kids stay in the cult of stupid. Ignorant and stupid people are easier to control, both by external grifters, but also by the parents.