No they’re not, no they don’t.

This should have far more upvotes than the easy “TikTok sucks” comments above. Whether you like the platform or not, it directly generates revenue for the musicians.

Anecdotally, the amount of times my kids have heard a song on TikTok then gone on to Apple Music and added it to their playlist - then usually listening to other songs by the same artists - must be in the hundreds by now.

Make that 10.

To be fair, every country believes their culture is superior in some way, partly because it’s beneficial for governments to instil a sense of nationalism in its citizens. India’s not alone in that.

I’ve been a SQL dev for years. Last week I spent half an hour reading up on why wrapping a bunch of queries in a transaction was giving me incorrect results compared to when they were separate committed statements. I was investigating locking or what might be happening in the execution plan that was throwing it off.

Turns out I just fucked up the where clause. I didn’t even consider the schoolboy stuff. This kind of shit happens all the time.

You see that everywhere. Even within countries that aren’t classed as developing nations. The UK massively shot itself in the foot with the disaster that was Brexit thanks to nationalistic propaganda and outright lies from campaigners, and US liberals have faced “anti-American” backlash for their views.

Rugby isn’t popular in England? Are you mad?

Rugby union playing countries

This is exactly why, and as simple as it is, it’s brilliant passive marketing. It stealthily implants an association to Apple Intelligence into every product and article that mentions AI, and might even require the author to distinguish their meaning when they use the acronym. They’ve Sherlock’d AI.

This was always the case in the web version of Outlook, and the mobile client. If you subscribe to 365, ads are removed.

I noticed this last year when I moved away from 365 and started getting ads on the Outlook mobile client. I ended up binning it off and just used the default Mail app on iOS, which is a shame because the Outlook app on phones is actually superb. Not good enough to put up with ads though.

And 2 million people in England are registered players. That’s 3.5% of the population. That’s just official registered players, not even fans. Your comment is absurd.

Perfect joke

Yeah, but only for 1. There would still have been no saving buying 3 over 2.

This is in danger of being an unpopular opinion, but the Xbox Series X is mine. For a comparatively low hardware price (i.e. vs PC), I’ve got access to current gen games, and (often) improved versions of a huge number of games from previous generations. Then there’s Game Pass. I know there’s bound to be divided opinion on the value of that, but for me it’s incredible. It’s very easy to find discounts, and the library is decent and updated regularly. For the cost of one triple-A game per year, I’m able to play several, plus my kids can download whatever takes their fancy.

Sure there’s the ownership vs rental argument, but I’m not one to revisit games I’ve beaten. For me, the Xbox represents the best value gaming proposition available (outside of piracy).

I remember the days of my PS1, which I loved, and I think I had a grand total of about 6 games throughout my time with it. According to the “Owned Games” section of my Xbox library, I have 250 spanning 4 generations , which doesn’t even include Game Pass. It’s borderline absurd!

The quick resume feature is excellent, the controllers are great, it’s silent, unobtrusive, and the streaming to other devices works great for when I’m at my desk. Couldn’t be happier with it.

Cheers yeah, that is standard usually. I was just having a whinge rather than asking for a solution. In this case the customer was trying to preempt having to complete a change request form (similar to what you’ve described) and get the relevant sign off etc, and had emailed over a “minor alteration” to an existing request, for which they should know better at this stage of the project.

That’s why we take no chances and mow them down with blue light vehicles.

Police car repeatedly rams escaped calf

Which led to some amazing protests.

Weirdly, watching facesitting porn in the UK is perfectly fine, as long as it wasn’t filmed in the UK.

I can just imagine trying to defend that in court. “Your honour, it’s clear to me that the muffled moans of the face-sittee are those of a Frenchman”

Mate, football and cricket are mandatory in those same schools, you absolute ring binder.

None of the messages that were sent to people have appeared in the chat history for that person. Except there are two new chats in her messages to people that she doesn’t know, containing only the rogue message.

Interestingly, her entire chat history with me has been wiped.

Case 3 is one separate text string containing the words ‘Complete or Cancelled’ (hence the quotes).

Yes I’m aware of this, I’m just saying that arbitrarily speculating on the potential original price for 1 item does nothing to change the current actual situation. If the cost was £10 for 1, I wouldn’t have bothered taking a photo.

Alternatively you could take the viewpoint that Next has already worked out that the price of 1 shirt is a minimum of £8, hence the costings for multiple units. Any price they put over £8 for 1 unit is additional profit, while the expected revenue per unit is £8+n where n is substantially close to zero. Latterly reducing the cost of 1 item does nothing except imply a perceived saving.

Additionally, the 2x and 3x offerings are not, and were never, discounted. The sticker reduces the price of 1 shirt, but if you were in the market for two, there’s no saving based on when you buy them. There might have been a saving originally, we assume, against the cost of buying 1 twice, but that’s irrelevant if you want two shirts at any point. Obviously the pricing would have been to incentivise the purchase of two when you would potentially only have bought one, so that is the driver for the sale, at which point the price per shirt is £8, and remains £8 per shirt for any multiple purchase, both before and after the sticker price amendment.

This is likely the best explanation, although there’s plenty of highly physical/athletic sports that are popular in hot countries. Football, arguably the most athletically demanding team sport, is popular in a bunch of places where I’d rather stay in the shade with a beer.

Great photo

Yeah, no question

Does it though? The moment 2x is £16 , the cost of 1 shirt is £8. Therefore there’s no scaling at 3x. It doesn’t matter how much the starting price was or how much the later prices were, if the 2x price is £16 and the 3x price is £24. The cost of 1 shirt is only ever £8 if you buy more than one, meaning that any pricing variant over 2x is pointless.

I’m not sure what you’re suggesting was solved. You’re positing scenarios whereas I’m presenting facts - the photo. Which, for the consumer, is mildly infuriating.

Exactly. In which case the 3x price is redundant.

There is no curve.

Yes - we don’t know what the original price was for 1x. You’re assuming it was more than £8. It could have been £5 - we’ll never know.

Either way, it doesn’t change the current value proposition for the customer, which is that a bulk purchase is meaningless.

Yeah but it was never that. Only the original price was changed with a sticker. The 2x and 3x were always as they were.