Nope. Not sure on the accuracy of that map considering maybe 1% of the population of our state has even had In-N-Out. I mean the closest one to us is either Utah or Texas.
Probably already discussed in this thread but I was wondering why the fuck Greenland looks so big on the map when it's fucking smaller in size than Democratic Republic of Congo https://www.worldometers.info/geography/largest-countries-in-the-world/ Cool site... search Greenland and drag it to see the true size https://thetruesize.com/#/aboutModa...QzMzI(MzU4NzMxNjA~!GL*MjExNjE0.MzI0MjY3Nzg)OQ
Awesome map. I used it the other way. I searched for countries on the equator and then dragged them up to the North Pole to see how big they got.
You can also do it with US states so you can really see how massive Alaska is since traditional US maps always make it smaller than it really is
My boss did this with Texas in a meeting with our European colleagues when they were patting themselves on the back about setting up a central processing unit in the Czech Republic to service all of Europe, and challenging us to do the same for North America. We're a food production company and 99% of what we make is consumed within 24 hours of production.
Today is the first I have ever heard of a Mod pizza. Never seen one physically, an ad for one, people taking about it, etc. Shit is made up.
There are a couple of competitors in that space. A big one is called Blaze Pizza which is basically the same thing and has lebron james as one of its big investors
not to say you’re wrong in any way, but this post also tangentially points out how terrible our internal rail infrastructure is compared to Europe and Asia. Confounding given our country’s size and how much it would improve commerce.
In the first map: New Hampshire is understandable. Surprised Montana and ND aren’t even with NH. Nevada gets a pass.
so that's kinda what I was thinking, I guess its just the opposite (weighted by population) of the image above and is skewed by population and real consumption.
this is cool but in reality all it shows you is where the super wealthy people for each sector live. The amount of stock they own makes the average person’s stock inconsequential.
The way I understand the title is that it doesn’t weight investors, it says “how likely an investor is to be in a sector compared to average” So my 100 shares are the same as someone else with 10k.
Indeed, it also isn't including the super-wealthy in its measurements, its dataset is users of openfolio.com
be that as it may, wealth and account size was not taken into consideration in the underlying dataset of the map i just posted.
interactive maps showing COVID rates among major ethnic groups might be behind paywall, idk https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...virus-latinos-african-americans-cdc-data.html
yeah don't think too hard, it's basically a population map. Not sure what they thought that would accomplish