in my experience when it comes to sofas the old "buy cheap buy twice" holds true. there are reputable brands such as ligne roset for example. they are pricey bit if you can commit to buying and owning for > 15 years. owning a clam and a togo for more than ten years and the are basically like new. foam & fabric. i understand this might unaffordable to a lot of people but buying second hand can be a great deal on high end sofas.
Hm thats quite a ways out for a pedestrian, and is more so for commuters.
Also unlike the other concepts, there is no Google Maps entry and no reviews, know any forum where people talk about this?
Like for the workers I wonder what personalities it is better for than the brothels or sauna clubs. Maybe they get to keep the whole commission? Or maybe they aren't good enough for the brothels or don't want to work a full shift?
Certainly looks like it's mostly FAR out of the way of where anyone would live. It's between the railway and the highway, between an insurer's head office and a factory, in between an area with some company depots.
They're trying to make the area south of the station a very expensive area, which is where the prostitution appears to be now (and hence the rents are "cheap" there).
So yes, I would say this is probably an attempt to move this activity out of where it is now, into an area where it definitely can't survive. I don't know, but I can't see this actually working. Why would these people move ? They sure as hell can't look for customers around that area.
“I’m sure there will be applications that nobody will expect. I think the hallmark of good science is when you do something just because it’s cool and then somebody turns around and uses it for something you never imagined. It’s really nice to have this type of creative stuff.”
The same ones which have prevented large scale open military conflicts involving superpowers for the last 60+ years? Atom bombs have likely saved more lives than they have taken, if we had conventional wars with modern technology without MAD.
That’s one read on history. Another is that the world has been tremendously lucky to not have suffered a nuclear holocaust since WWII. Many powerful people have done everything they could to advocate for nuclear bombings in the past 60 years, and we’ve had some extremely close calls with near accidental launches.
You are right. It might be too soon to definitively say which take is correct.
It might be the case that a disaster (natural, economic, alien invasion, etc) might spark yet another world war.
I think the thing that saved the world was Stalin's stroke, if he had held onto power for longer he had the right kind of volatile personality to go 'fuck it' and start something..
We have no way of knowing, in retrospect, what the real risk of global nuclear war was. We live in the universe where the die roll came up "no", and we don't know if the odds of our survival were 99% or much less than that.
How do you weigh the certain death of millions vs. peace with a small chance of utter annihilation? I don't know, but I don't think it's as easy as you say.
The US atomic bomb project didn't fit that description, I don't think. It was started expressly because people believed they were in a race with the Axis to develop one first. I am surprised that Einstein's letter to FDR isn't all that universally known these days.[1]
That's not really how the history of atomic bombs went down. Szilàrd imagined the destructive power of chain reactions around 1932, nuclear fission was discovered in 1938, and soon after the Manhattan project was started with the clear intention of understanding the science enough to make a bomb.
I frequently encounter people who believe that nuclear energy was harnessed initially for power generation and then co-opted for destructive purposes. The first nuclear reactor was created to enrich uranium to make a bomb.
