I 'downgraded' from an iPhone XS to an iPhone SE. I had misplaced my XS and got an SE temporarily. Best thing to have ever happened - the iPhone SE is the best iPhone apple has ever made.
So much so that I have an XS and the SE and cannot get back to the XS.
I know HN has some weird opinions sometimes that aren't representative of a majority. But I genuinely think if people used this or gave it a shot they wouldn't switch back.
Nah mate. Used AltaVista. The switchover had nothing to do with 404s or 'freshness'. Google was just easier in that day. You'd assume it was something technical that you could have altered but from a user perspective I highly doubt it had much relevance.
Have you given Safari and to a lesser extent Edge a go? I have the same experience with Chromium based browsers, less so with Firefox. I find Safari heavily optimised, its just bad with reloading/repainting the page when using the back button.
I think the problem is the guys making Chrome have 256G of RAM on their dev machines and hardly ever have the constraints of a normal use situation. Optimising RAM usage doesn't seem to be a priority.
Typically with an index fund, imagine a pie of the money. It's split up and invested into companies, but the allocation depends on the market cap of each company relative to the whole pot.
This means returns aren't based on the ability of companies to perform it depends on how big they are at the time. The bigger they are the more allocation of capital they get. Say you have a small company with a very high return rate on its investments, it would get a meagre rate of return compared to say Phillip Morris/Altria which has a lower rate of return, but is just big so it gets a bigger allocation.
You'd think its Darwinian but it has odd effects because what's big stays big, and it has nothing to do with the ability of the company to perform now, but what it did decades ago.
Wouldn't agree with you because a company that can return a higher rate of return on capital than one that can't get an allocation based on market cap.
The rebalancing China needs is towards domestic consumption, even for itself to be more sustainable. What this has done is reduced investment and worsened consumption. It isn't really what the leadership want. China currently retains near the lowest consumption-as-a-proportion of GDP worldwide.
Controlling the Chinese economy is relatively easy with the state corporation machinery through the investment component and brings in robust economic growth in GDP numbers, but consumption really sags.
FWIW the entire western economic system canters around the consumption portions of GDP. That's why everyone loves to export to the US/Europe/Australia. Consumption is resistant to short term economic shocks.
You'll have many around here boasting higher saving rates in Asian nations, but these are the reasons the economies are far behind (inc Japan). Look at the other side of savings, more spending means more is earned as well creating a net social surplus for everyone beyond the private scale of saving. It takes exports to make up for this shortfall.
Your comment sounds a bit like a gorilla pounding its chest. unfortunately it doesn't bear to reality. Regarding the press releases, Volkswagen is a bit more trustworthy than Tesla's.
Amazon has some of the poorest content out there at the moment and quite a good distribution system. There's only a handful of great shows they make, at least so far.
Contrast that to Disney which is aces on content, and a wildcard on distribution. It's more likely than not to be a bigger competitor than Prime.