Vrtrx

No, they are smaller. The largest size is 30cm which is enough for me though. The most expensive one with that size costs 11,50€. Another delivery place has 32cm ones. Most expensive there is 9,40€. There is nothing inherently wrong with them. They aren't from an Italian restaurant though and aren't the same quality you would get in a real restaurant. They still taste good and satisfy your pizza cravings though. Delivery is free too if you're over the minimum order balance. From what I'd guess they are on the are more like those fast food pizza places like Pizza Hut or Domino's but I've ordered like maybe once from them so I'm not sure.

Maybe we both use deliveries differently. If I order something for delivery I don't expect Restaurant quality food. If your pizza is from a Italian restaurant and is really well made/restaurant quality I see why it's so expensive. For me delivery is more "fancy" than fast food but not as "fancy" as actually eating in a real restaurant

Yeah sounds expensive to me. Also a German. 1 Pizza delivered is around 10€ that's it. But that wouldnt get me over the minimum delivery order though. Not a problem for me yet since I've never ordered a pizza only for myself

But that's the thing about induced demand. Of course widening a road temporarily improves traffic. But only temporary. That temporary improved leads to more people deciding to drive a car when they didn't in the past or even having different moving options in mind now which they didn't because if traffic. In the end traffic ends up the same if not worse than before. That's not something the Internet came up with. It's been studied and researched for years. It works on the simple principle of: If you make something more convenient to use, more people will use it. Cars just don't scale. They can't do mass transport and aren't meant for that. You need to make a city walkable and have a proper public transport system otherwise you will only ever lose even more money on car infrastructure while continuing to worsen traffic, heating up the city because of the sealed surfaces, making the city less desirable to actually exist in and worsening it's economy. Build the city properly and people will actually choose a different option. No matter the climate in that city. Especially because heat is only worse with massive amounts of car infrastructure because they usually result in less green spaces and trees which provide shade and a cooling effect in the city.

Induced demand actually means that more people drive now because the people that didn't drive in the past / lived somewhere else because it was less convenient because of the traffic to commute by car or live somewhere else where they would have needed a car now decide to commute by car / actually move (yeah that also something we have observed) because the widening temporarily improved traffic. In the end traffic ends up the same if not worse. Induced demand isn't something the Internet has come up with. It's actually a real thing that has been studied and researched. We know it exists. It functions on the basic principle of: If you improve something and make it more convenient to use that something, more people will actually use it.

That's the thing: Technically yes. It temporarily improves traffic. But only temporarily. IDK about you but spending billions of dollars to only temporarily improve traffic and then it ending up the same or even worse than before doesn't sound like a good investment to me.

That's the whole thing about induced demand though: People want to get somewhere and believe it or not, not everyone does so by car. But if you decide to add more lanes it temporarily improves traffic leading to those people that didn't take a car in the past or lived somewhere else because they knew traffic would be horrible if they moved, to actually commute by car now / go forth with their plan to move, increasing the amount of traffic again until it's as bad if not even worse than before. Cars don't scale. Cars aren't for mass transport and shouldnt be used for that. A city with a highway like in the picture really needs a transit system/a better one and fever lanes

I wouldn't really trust this site. Videos that go through a lot of different benchmarks /programs and games are way better. This shows the M2 being pretty average/normal between other laptop CPUs: https://youtu.be/FWfJq0Y4Oos

And this shows M2 Ultra vs the top Intel CPU at that time: https://youtu.be/buLyy7x2dcQ

The things that's impressive about the M[x] chips are their efficiency. Apple basically lying with the performance graphs they put out is really frustrating when they have an actual amazing metric they could show: power consumption. That's what a RISC architecture is good at

Afaik, no. Japanese either uses 音読み onyomi = Chinese reading (literally "sound reading", 音 = sound, 読み = reading) and 訓読み Kunyomi = Japanese reading (訓 has multiple kanji meanings. I learned it as "instruction". Sites list the meanings as 訓 = instruction, Japanese character reading, explanation, read) for words that have kanji (Chinese characters). The original Chinese characters don't have a "Japanese reading" afaik. They are Chinese after all.

Idk I feel like buying a cat with your groceries was a bit too much. Should have just skipped the groceries and only bought the cat

If they hold on to their existing vehicle than thats just another upside. If they buy a new gasoline car instead of an EV this is bad. But EVs dont have to be insanely heavy if we stop the whole cars getting bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger crap. They will still be heavier than their gasoline counterpart but one solution might be 2 tax brackets: One for gasoline cars and one for evs that has the same taxation levels but allows for, lets say, 500kg more weight in them

And I never argued against that. I just gave you one reason as to why their phones are more expensive. Of course used is greener than new.

It's not inherently more ethical though. While it could be argued that more green means more ethical because you are trying to harm the planet as little as possible if you buy a phone that's been produced with exploitation and child labor in its production line you still end up supporting it when buying used because you are part of the second hand market that supports people buying those phones. People will take into consideration if they can ever sell their stuff again when buying something. Those things would have to be weighed against each other if you want to make the statement that used phones are also automatically more ethical.

Buying a used phone that didn't have those things in its production line and actively tries to avoid it would technically be the best choice. But ultimately it's something the consumer shouldnt need to choose anyway. Regulations shouldnt allow for that to happen on the first place.

My initial answer to your comment made it pretty clear that I was explaining to you one reason as to why these phones are more expensive than other ones. That was it. If you're this far without noticing what the discussion was about maybe it's you that isn't reading very well