Or have a textbook that I can get some help and hints while working through problems and get stuck like you might get with a good study partner.
I honestly think the packaging my Amazon stuff comes in is much more eco friendly than the actual product packaging itself.
Or is this a deal like complaining about Apple supposedly using slave labor, while blithely ignoring the fact that every other computer and cell phone comes out of essentially the same Chinese factories? If anything, the people who crank out low-end Android phones probably get paid less than Apple's workers. I'm nearly 100% certain they don't get paid more.
I'm skeptical that Galaxus warehouses are worker's paradises, because I did a few stints at warehouse work as a youngster.
You know what? Warehouse work sucks, and it sucked long before Amazon came along.
I never said galaxus was a workers paradise. It’s still work. But work at regular conditions, not the exploitative ones Amazon is famous for.
Did you seriously never hear about the amount of workplace accidents rate at Amazon vs other companies? The people who died in the warehouse collapsing a few months ago because there was a hurricane and employees were not allowed to go shelter? The workers peeing in bottles to avoid bathroom breaks and keeping their grueling per hour quotas? The union squashing efforts by Amazon? The notoriously bad working conditions at Amazon (warehouse but also software)?
I’ve never heard that about other Swiss companies I purchase from. It’s probably not paradise. It’s still not Amazon level of hell and exploitation.
On a practical level, Amazon quality is shit, you get damaged or used returns sold as new, returning stuff means sending it to Slovakia out of pocket and waiting weeks for it to be processed (or returned to you because Amazon never accepted delivery), then fighting to be refunded, sometimes stuff gets stolen in your return parcels by the mail service… I really can’t see a point to undergo all this BS and feed Amazon to save 10–20% on the odd thing I buy and can also find from domestic retailers.
I hear stories about Amazon, but NEVER about other warehouses. That's the whole point.
> I’ve never heard that about other Swiss companies I purchase from. It’s probably not paradise. It’s still not Amazon level of hell and exploitation.
That does not follow. You've "never heard" anything one way or another, which means that you have no evidence of any kind.
I, on the other hand, have personal experience with working in non-Amazon warehouses. They all sucked.
Amazon is also notorious about exploiting workers. I seriously doubt you’ve never heard that claim or read anything about it and think it’s just another normal [warehouse] job.
https://www.vox.com/recode/23170900/leaked-amazon-memo-wareh...
I asked you for evidence that Galaxus warehouses are substantively better.
Since you have provided no such evidence, I conclude that you have none.
I’m not going to debate this with you any further, you’re free to believe and do what you want.
Then you have absolutely no basis for comparison, do you?
> We’ve established that Amazon is worse than most companies in terms of safety, worker abuse, union squashing, environment
We've established nothing of the sort.
> It follows that most other companies are better than Amazon on some or all these aspects.
You have admitted you have no data. What are you basing your claim on? Sheer bigotry? Looks like it!
> I’m not going to debate this with you any further,
Blind assertion with no evidence is not a "debate".
I don't think parent comment is suggesting that people aren't allowed to change their mind.
They are pointing out that many people yell "hypocrite!" when someone does change their mind. It's already a phenomenon on social media where people will dig through someone's post history and drag them through the coals, using previous stances on a topic in an attempt to discredit the current stance. Parent is suggesting that this problem would be exacerbated.
Our reactions to stuff like that are defined largely by our cultural expectations, but those are in turn constantly shaped by what is made possible or impossible by technology. Back in the pre-voicemail phone era, for example, people would routinely call someone and expect them to be available for a half-hour chat - you could turn it down, sure, but in many cases it would be considered impolite to do so as a matter of social convention. Then voicemail appeared, and SMS was the final nail in that coffin.
So I think that this problem will exist for a while, but if the tech that enables it persists long enough, it will eventually go on as conventions change to adapt to it.
In my job you could call me a hypocrite all day and it wouldn't matter (though I'd find the uncreative repetition annoying)
In theory, changing your mind should signal that you are capable of thinking about things, and changing your mind based on what you learn.
In practice, most people's opinions are determined by peer pressure. You believe X because the important people around you believe X.
From that perspective, changing your mind means that your loyalty has changed. Previously you tried to be friends with people who believed X, now you are trying to be friends with people who believe Y. No one likes a traitor.
I’m fairly certain the vision pro could do it right now.
/small print: requires read all, send all permissions
I never built it, but it's perfectly possible to do.
The genius idea IMHO was the business model- If you were into certain things you wanted to keep private from most but only wanted to disclose to other people who were into those same things, you could pay a fee, and it would then show you others who were in that "market" (of ideas, drugs, sex, whatever). (It might only ask you to pay it if it found someone nearby who matched. And then it would automatically notify the other person unless you paid an ADDITIONAL fee... Not sure about the latter idea, but it was an idea.)
The only issue is everyone holding their phone up in front of their faces.
That would be a good argument over not permitting a unilateral notification of a match (which, at the very least, I wanted to make very expensive and thus profitable, if it's allowed at all). If it notified both people 100% of the time, and one of you was a possible impostor, you could report them. And from a legal standpoint, showing interest in a market doesn't make you guilty. And, you could possibly also build "cred" in one of these tagged "markets" by getting cred from others who say you're legit, and that information would be revealed at the same time (possibly at your discretion).
> The only issue is everyone holding their phone up in front of their faces.
No, the genius idea is its major issue, just by paying you gain access to private data (people's preferences) without any kind of chain of trust to make sure that someone is actually part of the group ("market" in your terms) for which they want access to.
By paying you could know that someone around you is looking for cocaine, or is willing to sell sexual services, or is looking to match other people from the same gender, or holds a certain political view against an authoritarian government, etc.
And you can be sure government agencies will do the same.
Your service would probably not be able to tie so uniquely to an individual, so there would be ways for people to transfer it.
Or just hire a company to pretend to be you for a while.
With a service like this we could all live like Kings!
> A Farley file is a set of records kept by politicians on people whom they have met.
> The term is named for James Farley, Franklin Roosevelt's campaign manager. Farley, who went on to become Postmaster General and chairman of the Democratic National Committee, kept a file on everyone he or Roosevelt met.
> Whenever people were scheduled to meet again with Roosevelt, Farley would review their files. That allowed Roosevelt to meet them again while knowing their spouse, their children's names and ages, and anything else that had come out of earlier meetings or any other intelligence that Farley had added to the file. The effect was powerful and intimate.
> Farley files are now commonly kept by other politicians and businesspeople.
iOS 17 already uses a local LLM under the hood for autocorrect and text suggestions. Responses to the change (at least for people who actually noticed it) have been pretty universally positive.
Most people find having more money to be helpful.
https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1ovTscY-bEuMNAEgNXTCX...
As well as when I pick back up reading after two weeks -- remind me everything that's happened so far? Where it gives a five-paragraph summary where the first paragraph is top-level covering the entire story so far, and the last paragraph is just about the previous few pages.
Not to mention with non-fiction -- highlight an acronym that was defined somewhere 28 pages ago and tell me what the heck it is again?!
I do this on my Kindle. Highlight the name, search, and the first occurrence is usually their introduction. No AI needed.
"He passed ten hours out of the twenty-four in Saville Row, either in sleeping or making his toilet."
Huh? Does the character need to eat more fiber? Try selecting "toilet" in that sentence for a definition. You'll get the most common one, which only makes me more confused. AI should have an easy time knowing that the appropriate meaning is the OED's definition 5a: "Frequently in form toilette. The action or process of washing, dressing, or arranging the hair. Frequently in to make one's toilet."
No AI, so no big concept of inferred identities, but if someone's referenced by name you could long-tap the name, and get a list of all previous references in the text. Super useful for referencing secondary characters in super-long epics like The Wheel of Time.
There is value to that, if we mostly only use this capability to digest books we otherwise wouldn't read but also if we don't stop reading books. Most likely we'll just stop reading books, and that strikes me as scary.