Thanks for the enlightening framing. When they’re rounding up people they don’t like we should tell them it’s ok, it’s been worse
Nobody fucking cares. This isn’t some academic exercise to rank crazy times. This is the very real political strategy of a party about to take power in the US. This view from nowhere shit is so exhausting.
It's been somewhat traumatic. I had to take things back to where they began two generations ago, return to the roots that once were, though they're new to me. I'm grateful that you and I could commiserate, at least. It's validating to speak to others who felt the same.
I am genuinely happy for you, but I'm poor so I literally don't have the money to move. The best I can do at this point is put away a little of money when I can (not often) and hope for the best.
Same. In my opinion, America—"the Great Experiment"—is at this point mostly a failed experiment. But the goal for which said experiment originally strived is still a worthy one.
It's like one of those idiots came up with this stupid idea and now none of the other morons can call this out because they would have to admit that they are watching porn.
Yeah, but a lot of conservatives, and by extension fascists, are extremely hypocritical on the surface, except they like to use "hypocrisy" as a tool against their opponents, and by "hypocrisy", I mean not following the strawman version of your ideology. I personally call this as "rulebending", they're manipulating their opponents rules to be even higher and thus choking them with it.
On a deeper level they just want a lot of power, which includes them being above the law, as long as they're loyal to the dictator/king. If project 2025 succeeds, expect one of them getting caught on live with real CP, maybe even raping a child, then will just go "so what? I can do this, you are not allowed to!".
This was tried in court. The response from the judge was "If the man is dead, then he cannot petition the court. If the man is not dead, then his life sentence has not been served." An excellent exchange of sophistry!
the study finds that people who are otherwise very good at math may totally flunk a problem that they would otherwise probably be able to solve, simply because giving the right answer goes against their political beliefs.
...
it turns out that highly numerate liberals and conservatives were even more—not less—susceptible to letting politics skew their reasoning than were those with less mathematical ability.
Interesting. I wonder if it could be a kind of Dunning Kruger effect where you assume because you're good at logic or some other smart thing your brain doesn't have all the same zero day exploits as the rest of us.
Everytime this is reposted in a new template I remind everyone that no one is using incognito mode to hide from their ISP they are using it to hide from their spouse or partner.
Yes, but I want auto fill turned on for some websites because they go straight to the section that I want instead of navigating through the site every time.
I produce a podcast that gets us into some twisted corners of the internet. Especially when I fact check things for the other hosts. Mullvad + proton VPN always up, no question.
Beyond that it's legitimately useful for logging into a second account on a site or for various testing purposes as a web developer. Though if you're consistently using it for the former, containers are a better solution.
I don’t need the obvious URL’s popping up whenever I start typing. I’m just one fat finger away from a bad mistake and subsequent loud sounds on my studio speakers when anyone could be around if I don’t do that.
It’s best to keep that stuff separated out to spare yourself some incredibly avoidable embarrassing moments.
I use private mode for a whole bunch of stuff, visiting shopping sites i dont want coming up in targeted ads, watching youtube videos that are out of my usual jam and not wanting to get endless suggestions for crap im not into because i wanted to see a plumbing repair how-to or listen to a song wildly out of my usual genres because i was in the mood.
No doubt. Whoever’s making these memes obviously wasn’t around when Incognito/Private browsing was introduced. It was never advertised as hiding anything from your ISP.
i use private windows mainly so i don't clutter up browser histories with useless stuff i won't go back to (if i do run across something to save, it gets bookmarked or printed to pdf).
Yeah thats why I use Firefox Focus on mobile. It has no feature to save history. I use normal Firefox in case I want to save history or login permanently
Yes, they do. I use 4 different browser profiles for various things. But everyone who uses my computer while I cannot control what they do, gets their own user account or can use a guest account.
I've always been used to browser clearing everything on exit. On my phone I set Firefox focus as the default browser so whenever I search anything I just dump it after
I'm in my thirties, single for years and occasionally make sexual jokes. People know I fap. Everyone faps (huh, could be the title for an educational children's book..), I don't hide my browser history. Other question is who from? I live alone.
How did you know that I was referring to (that famous person) from (the other side)? Blast, I would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling sleuths! :-P /s
JFK doesn't. He never appeared, at least not in any of the episodes before the latest reboot. One can only assume that JFK got assassinated in the Futurama timeline as well, so there wasn't enough of his head to put in a jar.
Lincoln was shot in the back, not the head, so I guess that's how he got there.
Just a reminder to our American cousins that in British English, trump means the noise an elephant makes but also to fart: "Sorry I trumped." Donald the Trump is a noisy noxious unwanted thing on the world stage.
Sideshow Bob is actually an eloquent speaker, and is more the psychopathic kinda crazy, not the "Right now, Obama is spying on me through the microwave!"
My dad died the same day David Bowie died. It really sucks to have all of your friends post things like, "David Bowie was an inspiration to me and made me the person I am today. His star has fallen and I will be devastated forever. Also, sorry about your dad, dude."
After the following years, I've quietly taken the whole "this is when we diverged into the darkest timeline" schtick an iota more seriously. It's been a strange 8 years.
My friends and I still use TS3. The audio quality and voice activation is better than Discord's, and the desktop app doesn't take ten fucking gigabytes of RAM to run.
Open source is too far, but as part of a shutdown of a game and it's servers there should be a year long period where the publisher is required to release the game without DRM, including the server software, to all customers.
I could see it going through Steam, you get a message "Delistment notification: The Crew is being delisted, get your permanent copy now!"
Worse solution, but I would accept if publishers were forced to clearly display the exact date when the game will stop functioning at the point of purchase and all advertising materials.
I see what you're getting at but this would be difficult for a publisher to stick with in the event the game does horribly. Requiring them to keep their word to the date advertised would end up with them only guaranteeing a week, or send ramifications through all industries requiring truth in advertising.
A middle ground would be simply to legislate that when games require online connectivity for any reason, the appropriate software is released to allow a locally run server to enable online function at the time the company decides to decommission their servers. Then require them to hold these files in an accessible manner for at least as long as the servers had been active for.
That would be difficult in the event the company goes out of business, but I'm sure this would be a difficult thing to explain to most politicians so maybe not so simple after all.
If they can't keep their committed date (or fold entirely), then the source goes open. If every copy happens to get deleted during the bankruptcy, treat it as criminal fraud by the top levels of the company and go after everyone that could have decided to improve backups and other IT methods of avoiding that but didn't. That's assuming it was accidental, higher penalties if it can be proven to be deliberate.
In an ideal world, the penalties you describe are suitable. Though, gaming industry aside, for the executive level of most any corporation, being a scapegoat and handed a golden parachute is the worst case scenario for them leaving. In many cases floating across the street right into another executive position.
Jail time isn't a likely outcome. It just isn't the world we live in, unfortunately.
Yeah golden parachutes are such a joke in this society that likes to pretend to be a meritocracy.
Though on that note, I'd love to see a law that limits golden parachutes to the lowest paid position in the company. Hell, I'd be ok with that being scaled to full time. Not because disgraced executives deserve even that much but because it would give some incentive to increase pay rates across the company. I've also long thought that executive compensation should also be limited by some multiple of the lowest pay. And yeah, I'd include stock options and grants in that (for both employee and executive compensation).
Agreed. The whole idea of these huge payouts could be eliminated and replaced with what exists for everyone else - severance pay. Calculated off a regulated minimum formula, based primarily on how long the person served the company.
I also agree with you that the top and bottom salaries should have a correlation. The C suite making the salary of a shelf stocker in one day should not happen. I think I could accept that the top gets somewhere around 10 or 20 times higher salary. Even 100x would be an improvement to the way it is now.
Like you point out, between stock options and whatever else, an executive salary could be a few hundred thousand, even if their total compensation is tens of millions. In fantasy land it would be nice if, once a company grows to a certain point, say a billion dollars in value, if it were required to convert to an employee owned cooperative entity.
It's a shame things are the way they are. Maybe one day we won't have politicians that can be bought. That's a different discussion altogether.
I think the company should also be required to clearly state the amount of time they'll keep supporting the game and will operate the servers for. If they decide to shut them down early, everybody should be given the choice to either receive a full refund or the non DRMd version of the game + the server software like you suggested.
In general I think all paid games should be required to clearly state the amount of time they'll keep providing feature updates for, as well as support for new hardware, major bug fixes, and minor bug fixes. Although games that aren't online and just reach EoL are still playable for quite some time, eventually there'll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing. That might not happen for 50 years, at which point you probably don't care, but still. I'd give more leniency to indie Devs and games made as passion projects, though.
Although obvious once you think about it, I don't think most people realise or even think of the fact they will eventually not be able to play the game they're buying. And these mega companies need to stop making games they dump 6 months after launch.
I get what you mean but that is not feasable, however, if we look back at the old multiplayer experience like in Unreal Tournament 2004, the company runs a master server, and the community runs the game servers.
The master server just lists the game servers and allows for a server browser. That is WAY less resource intensive and can be run almost indeffinately.
The master server for UT2004 ran continously for almost 20 years, and when Epic announce it was shutting down, a fan server was created and after a quick edit of the config file you can play UT2004 multiplayer exactly like it was in the past.
So let's go back to that model of multiplayer, it requires a bit of skill to set up your own server securely, but you'll have way more choice and less commitment of resources from the publisher making it available for longer at less cost.
eventually there'll be some breaking operating system or hardware change that will force the use of a virtual machine, compatibility software, or other types of emulation to keep playing.
I still can play Unreal from 1998 on modern Linux. Faust bless Torvalds and his "never break userspace".
For a brief moment in the beta for all this, it basically just summarized the top two or three reputable results, and attached a link to where it got the data.
They should have just left it at that, and not started mixing in random blogs and social media sites.
The ability to summarize the Wikipedia article and a random university professors page where they list every fact known to man about pine trees or something was actually helpful.
If I want the AIs best guess about how to fuck up a pizza, I just go to the site where I can ask it. Bad advice when searching is just shit.
A tldr for "what is turpentine" is actually helpful.
This is the answer. Here in this US checks are still widely used, and sometimes, thanks to processing fees, the only payment except cash someone will accept. Mobile payments, though available, haven't really taken off here like in Europe.
I used bank deposits. First through the mail, then through electronic-but-not-Internet payment systems and finally online and mobile banking. Also bank authorizations.
Checks were never big here, but they had been phased out completely in the 00s. I haven’t actually seen one since the nineties. I have never owned a check book.
This is funny, my son works at a printing place that prints, among other things, checks. And they apparently make a LOT of checks. He’s 25 and was confused why so many people need checks.
This. I can tell you from a banking standpoint we were ordering FAR fewer registers and other check stuff over the years and before I left they had reduced the amount we even could order to like 10 books per order, so not at lot and old ladies would come take them all.
Yes, my wife and my employers both pay using checks as well as printed invoices after direct deposits.
My entire family uses checks to pay each other. I'm not going to Venmo my dad $15,000. And his back doesn't let me transfer funds to him for since idiotic reason.
Man, I would never pay rent or a mortgage payment with a deposit. I did that once, and they claimed I didn't pay several times, and I had no receipt. I had to pay my bank $20 to provide proof of deposit (several times) Fuck that. Also fuck US Bank.
In ye old days I would fill out a slip of paper and mail it to the bank.
Deposit is probably the wrong word. It’s more a transfer order? Deposit is what came up when I translated my local term, but it’s not like I stuffed cash in an envelope or anything.
I don't know about that guy but you can't even get cheque books in NZ anymore. They were phased out, mostly because electronic payments are ubiquitous and most places already stopped accepting cheques a decade or two back.
I'm mid 40s and didn't get a credit card until I was 25. And I couldn't even pay for any utilities, rent or car payments with it. And still can't. Online bill pay wasn't a thing until like after the recession.
It's mainly in the USA it seems. In South Africa, we have had internet banking since 1995. So businesses stopped using checks around that time. Phone banking with DTMF was popular around that time as well. Bank transfers we used more than checks for businesses before then.
For individuals, debit cards became the default around the same time. Same functionality as a credit card, without the credit.
Then Internet banking became mainstream for individuals around the 2000s when everyone got access to the internet on their phones.
Cash remained popular throughout since ATM infrastructure was very good in South Africa.
How is this possible? How did you pay your bills before online billpay systems - did you pay them all by phone?
We had something called an ‘acceptgiro’, it was basically a pre-filled money transfer order. Usually the amount, beneficiary and some reference number were pre-printed. All you had to do was sign it and mail it to the bank (which usually was free, you had pre-paid envelopes from the bank). It was usually attached to the bill, basically a tear-off part of the bill that you signed, stuffed into an envelope and mailed.
For recurring payments you usually give the other party ongoing permission to directly take it from your account. This is still extremely common and how I pay 99.999% of my bills. For things like mortgages, rent and insurance it’s usually required to pay in this way. Basically, my monthly bills get paid without me even having to think about it.
There's a big difference between being against Israel and being antisemitic, and people need to see that. Heck, I'm literally Jewish and I don't support Israel.
And, as I've heard someone else point out - isn't it literally anti-Semitic to assume that Jews and Israelis are, like, the same thing? And/or that Israel is, like, the global mouthpiece for Jews everywhere? Seems a bit reductive, to me... Seems on the same level as thinking the leader of Kenya, or Nigeria, or any African nation speaks for Black people everywhere.
I've always felt the nation of Israel is squatting on the name. Like, aren't there people outside of Israel-the-nation that also claim to be Israel (in the Biblical sense)?
Rubenberg 1989, p. 358: "The labeling of individuals who disagree with the lobby's positions as "anti-Semitic" is a common practice among Israel's advocates. For example, when Senator Charles Mathias [R., Maryland] voted in favor of the AWACs sale to Saudi Arabia, a Jewish newspaper in New York commented: "Mr. Mathias values the importance of oil over the well-being of Jews and the State of Israel. The Jewish people cannot be fooled by such a person, no matter what he said, because his act proved who he was." Former Congressman Paul "Pete" McCloskey [R., California] also has had the charge of anti-Semitism leveled at him: "When I ran for reelection in 1980, I was asked a question about peace in the Middle East, and I said if we were going to have peace in the Middle East we members of Congress were going to have to stand up to our Jewish constituents and respectfully disagree with them on Israel. Well, the next day the Anti-Defamation League of the B'nai B'rith accused me of fomenting anti-Semitism, saying that my remarks were patently anti-Semitic." Indeed, it may be that the weapon of greatest power possessed by the pro-Israeli lobby is its accusation of anti-Semitism. George Ball comments: "They've got one great thing going for them. Most people are terribly concerned not to be accused of being anti-Semitic, and the lobby so often equates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. They keep pounding away at that theme, and people are deterred from speaking out." In Ball's view, many Americans feel a "sense of guilt" over the Holocaust, and the result of their guilt is that the fear of being called anti-Semitic is "much more effective in silencing candidates and public officials than threats about campaign money or votes.""
I am "against" religion as I think it does more harm than good but I am pro religious freedom for everyone and a peaceful cooperative global society. So I think that makes me hardly hateful towards religions or the believers. Well tbh I have a hard time accepting religious extremist positions in societies, but everything comes with a price... I take religious freedom for everyone if that means someone thinks a book with instructions on how to abort a baby is against abortion and that it should be law.
Most extremists are worrisome. Some cause more trouble for those around them than others, though. An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn't, for instance, and that isn't great, but it's a more personal problem than trying to force your views and behaviors on others, which many other types of extremists try to do.
An extreme pacifist might get more abuse than someone who isn't, for instance
Don't know whether I'd qualify as extreme, but yeah, pacifism tends to be equated with all sorts of deliberate harm by some people who consider things like war and violent retribution necessary evils if not even inherently good 😮💨
Also, there's the "sticking to your principles in spite of popular sentiment is the same as naïveté" crowd 🤦
I’m against the Israeli government’s murder of children and murder of all the other innocent people in Palestine.
Should I be against Israel itself?
Note I’m [US] American, so I’m against the incalculable harms we’ve perpetrated on the world and our own citizens over the past couple hundred years. I would hesitate - pending some replies to me here - to say “I don’t support the USA” given the very cool people and the Bernie Sanders types and the benevolent US aid organizations and the National Parks and so on (some fediverse developers)… but have an open mind and curious to hear your thoughts on semantics.
At this point, when someone says they are 'against Israel', what they mean is that they are against the genocide the Israeli army is carrying out in Gaza. Maybe there are some who want the country itself toppled - neo-Nazis, for example, or those detached from reality - but they are a small minority (outside of Iran, perhaps).
Memes
Top
Dieses Magazin erhält keine Updates (letzte Aktivität vor 0 Tage(n)).