I think that’s just more examples of it being misused. BMI may be useful to compare populations in certain instances. It has value in being easily calculated based off data that is often easy to obtain. But, there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to use BMI for statistical comparison. That doesn’t mean it’s entirely useless.
It’s not really a “Tesla thing”, it’s an electric motor thing.
Seriously. My Nissan Leaf in Eco mode (which limits acceleration) feels peppy and is super fun to drive.
An ad-free web is definitely a pipe dream. But a targeted ad-free web should be a simple option available to users. I’d guess that the majority of the public doesn’t care too much about being tracked, and may even appreciate having their relevant interests targeted so that they see an ad that is more interesting to them. The problem is that, for those of us who don’t want to be targeted, there is no simple way to disable that. Companies have baked their ad targeting directly into the functionality of their platforms so it’s incredibly difficult to avoid targeted ads if you still want to use the most popular sites. I think this is the reality that is unacceptable.
Every browser should have a simple toggle to enable targeted ads and it should be every site should respect this. I’m not super educated on Google’s Topics solution, but maybe the step away from cookies could theoretically support that kind of reality. I don’t think Google is going to lead the charge on that kind of change, but we certainly need to get away from cookies somehow.
Cooper is credited as writer, director, and producer on the movie. I don’t think you can put this on the studio.
The US has limits on free speech in the name of public health and safety. There’s no assumption of limitless free speech in the US. People who cry “free speech” typically have no understanding of its actual legal definition in the country and just want an excuse to be a bigoted asshole without consequences.
Twitter, not being part of the government, gets to decide what content they allow and doesn’t need to worry too much about the legal definition of free speech. But, despite Musk’s claims, Twitter is not actually a space of limitless free speech. They’ve taken plenty of actions since he took over that limit the speech of individuals he disagrees with. Twitter is just interesting in giving a platform to hate. There’s certainly money to be made in monetizing hate (see Trump), but hopefully it doesn’t work out well in the end for Twitter or Musk.
That seems like a pretty solid approach. It still rewards the asshole, but calls them out on it without being rude and commits to not letting it be repeated. I don’t think screaming at someone over a missed fast food order is ever warranted, but I think it’s reasonable to be extremely charitable and give the person a chance to recognize and learn from their behavior.
The managers don’t want a fight so they’ll just give them what they want so they leave.
Unfortunately, this contributes to the problem. It’s a reward for being an asshole. I don’t blame managers or staffers for giving in just to get rid of the asshole because it’s not worth getting screamed at. But it’s like the “customer is always right” approach devolved into “being an asshole gets you free shit”. I wish corporate culture was “treat our employees well and we’ll treat you like a king, be an asshole and you’re banned for life” or something along those lines.
Also, your money recommendations are on point and OP should definitely do some smart saving while they have the extra cash. It’ll help them out a lot later in life.
My argument is that it’s not surprising that someone would choose to pay $20/mo for 1 service with all the things they want versus paying $100/mo to deal with 4 services.
The fact that Netflix et al pay their creators squat is a separate component. I was just pointing out that saying you want to pay content creators for their work doesn’t really equate to paying for a Netflix subscription. If someone wants to ensure they’re paying creators for their content, there are much better ways to do so. You can pay the $20/mo to pirate stuff, then donate to the Entertainment Community Fund, or buy something directly from a writer’s website with the $80/mo you’ve saved.
what’s the point?
Simplicity and overall cost. Pirating is cheaper and allows you to get everything in one place versus 5 different streaming platforms. I see the draw.
And it’s hard to make the case that paying streamers equates to paying the content creators with the strikes highlighting how little the actual creators get out of the deal. I’m in favor of paying for content, but you can’t say paying Netflix their continually increasing, and more restrictive, subscription fees is actually contributing to supporting creators who make good content.
I knew I wasn’t going crazy! That press any key habit is so ingrained because it’s been around since I played my first game on a 286 PC, probably longer.
I’m not experiencing that issue either and I have half the amount of RAM that you do. I’ve noticed an unnecessary autorefresh only after closing out of the browser for a long time, never in the middle of switching between apps. But, that does sound like annoying behavior.
Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Cheers :)
You are well within your rights to pay for that since it fits your family’s needs. But, describing it as saving money glosses over that it’s a result of a change in the terms of service. Netflix used to gloat about not caring that people were password sharing. They backtracked on that pretty hard.
I cancelled Netflix after they cracked down on password sharing because I’m a home of 1 screen. If the only option for 4k viewing is a 4-screen subscription that I can’t share, then that’s a ripoff as far as I’m concerned. If they’d offered a cheaper 4k, 1-screen subscription option I would have considered sticking with that. Ultimately, I probably would have cancelled as soon as the strikes happened just to support the creators, but that would be a separate decision from the password sharing stuff.
I think that differentiation is only a difference in how the benefit would be calculated. It would be quite a departure from the current state of things, but it’s worth being part of the discussion.
Assuming we’re all compensated at different rates based on our value to the company, then one person’s time is more valuable than another person’s time. As the employee, commute time and work time might as well be conflated since it’s time spent away from the rest of our lives. It’s different for the company, of course, since commute time is not productive work time, but if we’re talking about this as benefits that companies might offer in order to retain or attract employees then I don’t think the company’s opinion matters.
I think you can factor it in along with all other benefits. Employees absolutely consider commute time when applying for work. If companies want employees in office and are trying to compete with employers that allow remote work, they need to start making a case for why the commute is worth it. Tech companies tried doing that with ping pong tables and beer, but now that remote work is so common that doesn’t carry much weight. Compensating an employee for commute time in some way seems like a reasonable benefit that companies should consider offering.
Yep, I wish I could disable voicemail, but there are important ones that come through from time to time that I don’t want to worry about missing. Not every profession has comfortably transitioned to texting/email and I can’t force them to.
So that they don’t dilute the brand recognition of Nothing. Same reason Toyota has both Toyota-branded and Lexus-branded cars.
That’s a gross over-simplification. I’d wager that you’re correct that the majority are scammy in nature since it’s so simple to create a nonprofit. But, there are thousands of important nonprofits out there doing good work. In my experience, the people that choose to mostly work with nonprofits are working with important organizations doing good work. That’s anecdotal, but it just seems pointlessly dismissive to lump nonprofits together as bad simply because they’re nonprofits.
Why not assume that this person’s job does some very basic due diligence to confirm they’re working with an authentic organization that’s doing good, rather than trying to “bust ur dream”.
Have you watched Warrior? I’m very curious how well the various actors speak their Cantonese (?) lines. The characters are all supposed to be born in China (except for one, who only speaks Cantonese despite being born in America). Most of the dialogue is spoken in English, but we’re shown that they’re actually speaking Cantonese when non-Chinese people are in the scene. So, most of the characters have to speak Cantonese lines at some point, but I think only a couple of them are actually fluent in Cantonese. There are English-Japanese, Canadian-Vietnamese, Indonesian, and some other combinations that are not Chinese.
Adapting a Disney Afternoon fantasy/action show into live-action horror is certainly a choice. At least, I’m assuming it’s horror based on the CVs of everyone involved. They’re certainly talented, but I loved Gargoyles as a kid and I think I’ll feel that this is a significant distortion of the original work. Still, I’m not going to actually judge it until I’ve seen it.