Acamon

In case any non-British are reading this, 'chav' is a term used to describe a small subset of British working class people. It used to describe young people with "loutish (ill-mannered) behaviour, violence, and particular speech patterns (all of which are stereotypes)" (Wikipedia.)

It is not a term used to describe the general working class population of Britian.

You're right that Britain has a big issue with classism and there's lots negative stereotypes about working class people. But 'chav' is a term for a specific subculture within working class British culture. Most people I know who hate 'chavs' are working class people who have to interact with them regularly. It's like if you were claiming that anyone talking about 'thugs' and 'gangstas' were hating on working class black Americans.

I think people spend less time have long conversations with people that they trust, which are best space for nuance and exploring ideas honestly. If you're messaging on social media, or even writing articles for blogs or publications, there's a whole bunch of incentives and barriers that push people away from nuance.

A survey or poll is different from a vote. You're right that unless we ask every single person in a group we don't know precisely how that entire group would answer. But this irrelevant, being able to establish patterns in smaller sample groups and extended them to larger population is one of the the cornerstone of science and knowledge.

An engineer needs to know how much weight a specific size and shape of lumber can safely take. They can't test the indvidual beam to breaking point and still use it. So they test other similar sized pieces of wood, under similar conditions, and generalise. This can be done well, or done poorly, depending on how well they can isolate confounding effects.

So with a survey, if I just ask 100 people I know, it's would be a decent survey of the beliefs of my social circle, but it would be a poor survey of national beliefs, because my friends are not a balanced representative sample of the wider population. That's why most polling / surveying uses methods to try and achieve a sample that is actually representative. When done well, these ensure the survey respondents correspond to the demographics of a population (gender, education, religion, location, health, etc).

Obviously this approach has its limitations, and can be done poorly, but there's a bunch of research and evidence for what methods help achieve more accurate results. Saying "this poll can't be accurate because they didn't ask me" is like saying "I don't know if the sun will rise tomorrow". You're right, we won't know for sure until we actually see it rise, but we can infer from past events and confidently predict the likely outcome.

If you want to say "this survey isn't accurate because it uses an older demographic model that has been shown to be ineffective at representing contemporary attitudal choices" or "this survey is inaccurate because it only controls for age, race and gender, but didn't account for patterns of social media usage which are highly relevant" that's fine, that's engaging with the methodology. But if the problem is "they didn't ask everyone so it's wrong" it really seems like you don't know how surveys works.

There's lots of architectural guidance, building codes, etc. normally linked to number of people in the household. But it's all pretty damn relative, both culturally and individually.

When I lived in the city, I was pretty comfortable with a small appartment, because I spent a lot of time out of my home in cultural spaces. Now I live in the country, and in city-terms our house is gigantic for just the two of us. Netherthless, we're continuing to convert old out buildings into more space because the demands on our home are much higher and we have lots of unused space.

Not only do we live there, but we've got jobs that involve a lot of remote working, and it's also a building site/workshop as we renovate and make our own fixtures and furniture. Plus, because it's more remote, we want guest bedrooms and extra space so that guests can come and stay for a while without feeling cramped. Then we've got animals, who bring their own clutter, and we also want to create a guesthouse that we can rent to tourists. Even without those extra requirements, we choose to sleep in adjacent, but seperate, bedrooms because we have sleep issues. And I know that is a crazy luxury that we wouldn't have been able to afford in the city, but when space is cheap, there's no real reason not to.

I know that my example is pretty extreme, but everyone's needs are different. I have friends who basically live in one room and love that, because everything is within easy reach and they don't want to have guests. But I know it would be depressing and claustrophobic for others. Sharing an apartment with four adult strangers is a different experience from a family home with four children.

I think there can be rules (you can't claim something is a bedroom if it's smaller than 6sqm) but there isn't a one size fits all solution.

It's the case for all dishwashers I know about. It's not that weird if you think about it. When people wash dishes by hand, they often wash a bunch of dishes in the same basin, with the water becoming increasingly dirty. Depending on how dirty and how much they care, they'll change the water occasionally. Then they'll give everything a rinse in clean water to get rid of soap. (obvs people do dishes on a variety of ways, but this is pretty common in western cultures.)

Dishwashers are the same, spray the same hot soapy water over the dishes for a while, until it's dirty and most of the solids have been removed. Then drain and wash again with clean water. The soapy stage is about removing dirt, but the sanitising comes afterwards with the hot rinse and drying.

What's a change that your government or society could make that would improve things for the people of Egypt?

And the single video that isn't a "Sponsored" ad is still from Red Bull, and basically an ad.

I'm assuming you know how surveys work? If you're genuinely interested in their data sampling methodology, you can easily find it on the website of the company that conducted the survey (who are named on the infographic).

I'm not making any big claims about YouGov and their reliability or freedom from bias, but this isn't just some random unsourced poll, so props to whoever made the infographic for bothering to include a source.

Important story, horrible situation. Definitely not "mildly infuriating"

Really depends on what you want from a job. Does good mean high pay? It's generally rare to have high paying jobs with low entry requirements, but ICE seem to be throwing money around if you've got no morals and abnormal low levels of empathy.

If good means 'good for community' or 'fun' or 'doesn't involve speaking to too many people' the answers will be quite different.

I've never tasted gatorade, so it'd definitely be a wild stab in the dark. Be intresting to test though!