sorted by: new top controversial old
52

So this is a rather niche question so I hope it is still relevant to this group, but I was thinking. The big package transport companies(in the US this is UPS and FedEx) make most of their air cargo money on overnight packages, where the business model is pretty straightforward. Have packages fly between a small number of hubs each night so you can relatively economically cover large areas with overnight service, because each plane is as full as it can be. The better question is how the same air cargo operation can transport the same packages in two days while being so much cheaper that they can charge 1/3 the cost of overnight. I can come up with a few ways, such as driving the package to a further away airport so you can put it on only 1 flight, or trying to drive it to a big hub before flying it, but all of these business models seem questionable at best because they seem to apply to niche cases only. Does anyone with more knowledge of the subject know the answer?

[-] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Hot take: the narrative that politicians do not understand technology due to their age is giving them too much credit. They have entire offices full of staffers whose entire job is to explain these things to them in ways they understand, as I am sure they have for some of the more important things. They just don't care because their purpose is to serve corporations, not the public.

[-] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

See this kind of shit is why I pirate, not because I can't afford to pay $10 a month. When the $10 for a lot of content becomes $10 per month per piece of media you like, and you can't watch it on your platform of choice, and you can't watch it on a flight without paying more or not at all, this makes the $5 per month I pay for a VPN sound like a far better service.

[-] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Why is it rooted in Nazi propaganda?

[-] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

A lot of transit can just be electrified with overhead wires

[-] Mayoman68@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Another interesting point is whether we attribute the successes and failures of a state on it's particular social, economic and political situation or it's ideology as the root cause of anything. Most people, when they agree with an ideology, will attribute the good things to the ideology and the bad things to specific circumstances, and the opposite with ideologies they do not agree with. The more nationalist Americans will tell you that Cuba is poor because it is communist, and that Bush invaded Iraq either because he was corrupt or because he was promoting freedom. However there's also the argument that Cuba is poor because it is sanctioned to hell by the US, and that Bush invaded Iraq because of American capitalist imperialism. Which one of these you agree with pretty much entirely depends on your ideological opinions rather than what actually happened, and as far as making a valid argument either one is at least a coherent point.

The reality is that you have elements of both the fundamental ideology and the specific political circumstances in every social outcome you see. Which is an idea quite fatal to most of the rhetoric you see nowadays and part of why it's impossible to have any political discussion with people you have fundamental disagreements with.

Mayoman68

joined 1 year ago