As a lifelong democrat, I find this to be very dangerous rhetoric. It sounds tonedeaf. Regardless of the candidate, being critical of politicians is a cornerstone of democracy.
I understand it's important to be a united front, but the need to seemingly bring dissenting voices into line is not a good way to do it. We cannot force people to say we have a perfect candidate for the sake of avoiding discussion.
Edit: a word
At a time when AAA often sucks so much, it sounds really out of touch to say your overpriced game is "quadruple-A".
Xfinity "10G" energy
The whole damn system exists to place the burden of a living wage on the customer while the company paying peanuts can claim no wrongdoing. And the really sad part is: it has worked.
Edit: and there are many, many businesses that wouldn't be in business if they actually had to pay competitive wages on their own. The invisible hand can fix nothing if tipping culture says to throw more and more arbitrary amounts of money at people to subsidize their wages yourself. At some point (I'd argue we're past it already), the band-aid needs to get ripped off. Only then will we see self-correction. The almost immediate loss of many businesses will likely trigger other actions. It's already a no-win scenario.
Yeah, this is a great example of a true statement that just serves to muddy the water of the actual argument.
A better way to think about it is: an AI-dependent photo is less representative of whatever is in the photo versus a regular photo.
Weird, I see "You will need to use a different service/company"
Most every other social contract has been violated already. If they don't ignore robots.txt, what is left to violate?? Hmm??
The housing crisis won't end until (among other things) corporations cannot freely own limitless numbers of single family homes. We will see perpetual renting because it's effectively passive income for the corporations, and they have deeper pockets than 99.9% of individuals.
As companies own more and more, but don't sell, supply dwindles, and the bubble never bursts.
One thing to keep in mind that may be relevant: copies of non-digital things are different than digital copies.
Digital (meant here as bit-for-bit) copies are effectively impossible with analog media. If I copy a book (the whole book, its layout, etc., and not just the linguistic content), it will ultimately look like a copy, and each successive copy from that copy will look worse. This is of course true with forms of tape media and a lot of others. But it isn't true of digital media, where I could share a bit-for-bit copy of data that is absolutely identical to the original.
If it sounds like an infinite money glitch on the digital side, that's because it is. The only catch is that people have to own equipment to interpret the bits. Realistically, any form of digital media is just a record of how to set the bits on their own hardware.
Crucially: if people could resell those perfect digital copies, then there would be no market for the company which created it originally. It all comes down to the fact that companies no longer have to worry about generational differences between copies, and as a result, they're already using this "infinite money glitch" and just paying for distribution. That market goes away if people can resell digital copies, because they can also just make new copies on their own.
"ChatGPT, solve this problem for me."
"As an AI language model, username checks out."
We paid for the development of the internet. We contributed the content. Now we watch the yacht owners take advantage of both because regulators are asleep at the wheel owned by corporations.
My math skills aren't what they used to be, but I see a short-term solution to their profit issues.
Because the US economy isn't doing well. The metrics that lead to that statement are wholly and completely disconnected from the American people who, except for a very, very select few, are not rich shareholders and really don't care how the S&P is doing if their pockets are constantly empty.
Rents are systematically high. Wages are systematically low. There is no end in sight. It's disconcerting that someone elected to represent me doesn't see that.
It might be true that you get more conservative after you e.g. own property, have a lot of money, or a bunch of other things that happened to boomers in their 30s.
Now that those things are far less accessible, people aren't moving conservative with nearly the same frequency. The fact that boomers did is a symptom of the easier time they had, but there's nothing intrinsic about aging that should make one more conservative.
Wait wait, I thought he said Putin was chill
Ahahaha what do you think it's 1995?
This is the way
When will people stop supporting this clown?
Remember when some people were like "well, I don't support him, but I've had this Twitter account forever, so I'm not leaving." This is what happens. Things just get worse until you gain plausible deniability for continuing to support the bullshit.
I'm waiting for it to start using units of banana for all quantities of things
Just to make sure it's clear: not being Deck Verified doesn't mean it won't run on the Deck or on Linux in general. It means Valve has not hit their testing threshold for the title to mark it as verified or unsupported.
More specifically, it means Valve cannot guarantee a) the game will run (though anecdotally, I've had most if not all unverified games I tried work without issue), b) that the text is large enough to be readable on the Deck, or c) that the controls are usable (=you might have to just use the configurator yourself).
I think a danger Valve has introduced with the verification system is people thinking that not verified == no worky.
Who saw this coming???
/s
If only there were some regulatory body the government had that could set things right!....right?
Meh.
It's not designed for or good for VR gaming. As an AR device, I find it a bit silly since I can just look at a real screen. It would be a novelty at $100, but at the price Apple wants I kind of think of it like a joke.
Mankind Divided is free right now btw
It's not free. The point is to get me to make an account on Epic and install their stupid launcher. That isn't free and I'm tired of people claiming things are "free" when in fact they exist to get you to sign up for another service. It's not free-as-in-air.
I encountered the mother of all captchas the other day: it had me picking a three-dimensional room diagram among six of them, matching it to a 2d top-down view of the room. It was way more time consuming than a typical captcha, and I had to do the same task five or six times.
I think we'll see harder and harder captchas as AI models get better and better. Eventually it won't be a realistic option since it just costs humans time and the convenience of whatever service they're trying to use.
Yeah, they're pricing themselves out of their own market. It's been happening for years but the recent economic shifts are making it more apparent.
As someone who has been remote for 8+ years, it's extra disconcerting that now some companies are more in the office than they were even before covid. It's totally about control as you said. I'm at least hoping that it eventually returns to where it was.
I wonder how many taxpayer funds they wasted in the quest to eliminate $1500 of fines.
I think all those dongles hanging off the car would have been a problem anyway
The original comment was pretty snarky so I see about as much snark as I'd expect, tbh.
And not to mention: the original versions actually run fine to this day. Pure money grab and they made the product(s) worse to do it.
Exactly. Watching this all play out is strikingly similar to watching Trump get away with a mountain of stuff that would have put a poorer person in jail, and yet, no consequences.
$50 is decent. It's a living wage. It is not exorbitant and there's plenty of incentive for workers aiming higher.
One of my most hated "arguments" is the notion that "well, I'm an experienced worker and I've only made $15/hr forever. Therefore I will actively fight against raising wages because my wages were always low". What self-defeating bullshit. If the minimum wage had been indexed to anything having to do with cost of living for the last half century, $50 would be about right.
But at a certain point, it's still a cop out. And part of the trick. If you drown anyone in enough bullshit, you can't expect it to all get called out -- but that doesn't mean it's not all bullshit. It is divide and conquer in another form.
I'm sure they do. AI regulation probably would have helped with that. I feel like congress was busy with shit that doesn't affect anything.
Windward is pretty fun and under the radar.
Sid Meier's "Pirates!" is old as hell but still a great game.
Love it. I wish there had been a single car in the game. Not one that you can buy, not a bunch of models. But one person in Saint Denis or Blackwater that happens to have a car. You could jack one car in the whole game.
Taking it on crazy trips across the map would be like a whole little minigame. Plus a nice nod to the GTA roots.
That's faulty logic. We know that mergers tend to lead to higher prices. We also know that there's already an issue with artificial inflation (=companies colluding to raise prices), as well as actual inflation.
Ultimately it's just simple addition if/when the merger goes through. It will exacerbate the existing issue.
I'm not sure what isn't getting across here.
Customers subsidize wages with tipping. The amount is ultimately arbitrary and allows business owners to avoid costs.
The actual cost of the wages is not arbitrary and should be put up by the business first.
Yes, but one way is on the company first and one isn't. Would prices go up if these places were paying living wages? Most likely. Many businesses would be insolvent because their business model was simply never designed to pay a living wage to employees. Others could remain solvent, but probably not if they continue to take so much off the top at higher positions.
And that's exactly it: the market never self-corrects if we throw arbitrary money in excess of listed prices to solve was is ultimately an issue of business solvency and ethics. There is no economic theory that would support such an idea in any industry, but here we are.
The sheer number of businesses out of the space might even drive down rents. That's the kind of thing I mean by "other actions". But things cannot continue as they are.
None of this is even to mention the sheer number of people in the service industry who are also on government assistance programs. They have to be -- none of the blame is on them. But my tax dollars go to that, plus I am expected to pay extra to subsidize their wages with tips. I effectively subsidize them twice while someone reaps the rewards on their yacht. All I'm saying is the yacht people should be taking the risks first. That's part of being a business owner.
My sentiments exactly. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as annoying as they can be. Now that I'm not using reddit I wish them the best of luck wreaking havoc.