One of the first movers, so many chat groups are still on there and it's very difficult to make people move. Many people simply don't care about privacy, ads, user experience and what not, they just want the convenience of staying in the chat groups they are already in. A shame really.
If people want more context for this: the place is named Baarle-Hertog, it's a small enclave like town located in The Netherlands, but is Belgian soil. These days, it's probably most famous just before New Years Eve, as Dutch people buy fireworks in Baarle-Hertog, as the fireworks sold in Belgium are illegal in The Netherlands.
Sure you can, but then we basically create the same situation as with Ticketmasters, all tickets will then eventually flow through your company and you can change policies again and we will end up with the same problems. With a blockchain solution (doesn't have to be blockchain for NFT's though) this platform can be decentralized and self managed, the rules are baked into the protocol, it can only be changed with the majority of voting rights. It basically enables the infrastructure for artists to control ticket sales (and reading at the gate) themselves, without having to use an agency. In your scenario, they would still need an agency.
For you as a user, this example can be interesting: event tickets.
Today, the market is dominated by companies like Ticketmasters and scalpers. Artists have very little control over their ticket price. Here in The Netherlands, some prominent artists started using GET to issue their event tickets on (these are technically NFTs). This gives them the assurance that the audience pays a fair price for the tickets and that scalpers cannot trade it for a higher price. Both the audience and the artist are better of using this technology, than issuing their tickets via Ticketmasters.
It's remains sad that the name NFT is tainted by scams. In business, we start using NFTs more in various other contexts than "art". NFT technology, without the scam marketplace, has many use cases that we only now start to see benefits from. It's a very good way to digitize assets and use them in business processes.
Many people wouldn't mind other people smoking, as long as it doesn't impact non-smokers. But the thing is, smokers aren't really all that considerate about non-smokers. I attended a couple festivals over the past week. It's really annoying when you stand in packed crowd as a non-smoker and someone starts smoking. Sure, we are outside, but it literally makes breathing harder, especially for asthma patients.
I don't really see a way in which smokers and non-smokers can coexists without the smoker impacting the non-smoker. Even if you only smoke outside of the restaurant/bar, it will still be annoying and unhealthy to people entering the restaurant or bar.
I'm very curious with how things will develop in France, where they banned smoking in area's where children are present, which is virtually everywhere.
Still begs the question why they need tax cuts then? It doesn't give them more power, it doesn't really give them much more money (in the grant scheme of things).
I agree. The whole existence of a government is based on the union of people to organize common infrastructure that might otherwise not be cost effective to be operated in a commercial manner. Therefore, public transport should be an easy 1, 2, 3. Unfortunately, it's not the reality.
Don't know where you live, but to put this into perspective: it's the same situation here and I live in The Netherlands (outside of the major cities). Even in a rich, flat country, the size of a post stamp, we cannot make mass transit work outside of larger cities. I agree that we need mass transit, but it's only one solution for the mobility puzzle. Cars also fit in there as a puzzle piece, especially in areas where the population density is lower.
So from my perspective, no, cars aren't just for the rich.
This is such great news! More ammo to use when trying to convince friends and family to move away from WhatsApp