r00ty

The “Interesting” is very Muskesque. I also think if it was DMs to someone else, even in the USA that’s got to be some level of a legal privacy issue.

Article 12 (from the 1993 adoption) of the additional protocols from 1974-1977:

Article 12 — Protection of medical units 1 Medical units shall be respected and protected at all times and shall not be the object of attack. 2 Paragraph 1 shall apply to civilian medical units, provided that they: a) belong to one of the Parties to the conflict; b) are recognized and authorized by the competent authority of one of the Parties to the conflict; or c) are authorized in conformity with Article 9, paragraph 2, of this Protocol or Article 27 of the First Convention. 3 The Parties to the conflict are invited to notify each other of the location of their medical units. The absence of such notification shall not exempt any of the Parties from the obligation to comply with the provisions of paragraph 1. 4 Under no circumstances shall medical units be used in an attempt to shield military objectives from attack. Whenever possible, the Parties to the conflict shall ensure that medical units are so sited that attacks against military objectives do not imperil their safety.

As I read it, it seems very clear it would contravene section 4 there.

EDIT: Actually I’d not call it clear. Because it seems to me they’re talking more about using hospitals and the like to shield military units. But I would argue hiding a unit in an ambulance is a good interpretation too.

What next? A toaster with butter spreader built-in?

Yes, but the it burns the logo of the highest bidder each month onto your toast.

Yeah, it’s not outside the realm of possibilities. But by far, they’re more likely to be updates for the smart features.

If you’re just using the HDMI ports, there’s not really many bugfixes you’re likely to need. Most bugfixes will be to the “smart” part. Which, if you don’t want to connect it to the internet, you aren’t using at all.

The thing is, they do already have lock-in in some ways at least. Otherwise I cannot imagine a restaurant wanting to give away 30% of each sale this way. Unless the other option is virtually no traffic.

Now see, I kinda had the idea for a syndicated delivery service (not online orders, but the internet would have been used to create the order data that would assign drivers) decades ago. I did some part time work delivering food back in the late 90s/early 2000s, and I always thought it was so inefficient. The place I was at, was very busy, he had a very large delivery area but even so. There would be times he was paying people to sit outside talking shit to eachother in their cars.

I thought it would make sense to have a larger pool of drivers that service multiple restaurants/take-aways. Adding the economies of scale to the problem to ensure that people were being utilised and lowering the cost to each place using the service. Of course also paying some money to the person running the business that brought it all together.

I don’t think I ever considered paying less than this guy did (which wasn’t a lot, but would likely translate to $5 or so an hour in the 90s/2000s).

One thing I find really interesting about uber eats/door dash (US)/Deliveroo (UK/EU). When you add up their fees, they take a delivery fee from the user, a service fee from the user, an even bigger service fee from the restaurant and pay the lowest possible fee that will keep drivers interested. Yet I always hear the services are losing money too. How is that even possible?

Take deliveroo in the UK. Looking now I can see (I don’t live in a city, so most places are some distance away). A place 4.5 miles away is charging £4.29 for delivery. Let’s make up an imaginary order:

Order total: £20 (including sales tax/VAT) User’s service fee: £2.39 (it seems to be 11% including the VAT with a maximum set of which I am not sure how much) User’s delivery fee: £4.29 (including VAT, since they need to charge VAT on a service) Restaurant service fee: £6 (30% on the VAT included total). I am really unsure how this works entirely in terms of tax though… Total for user: £26.68

Total deliveroo service revenue: Net: £10.57 VAT: £2.11 Total: £12.68

Reading between the lines from what I can see delivery riders are paid between £3 and £6 per delivery. Now, in the cities this is probably great. I do wonder how they do it in the towns and villages. When I look at the list of places available to me most are 3 miles or more away, with some up to 6 miles away. I do wonder how £6 compensates someone doing a 10+ mile round trip at times.

But OK the price they pay drivers doesn’t include any tax. So it comes from the Net total. This means per delivery in revenue they are always making £4.50 or more per delivery.

Yes, they need to pay support staff, but they are in low cost geographies. Yes, they need to keep development staff and the usual management overhead And yes, they need servers/cloud time to host this stuff.

Looking this up (not sure how good the source is) their revenue in 2023 was £2.7billion, which I believe. However they lost £38million. Where all the costs come from, I am not sure.

I wonder how these numbers compare to US based operators?