bluetonium

Google should stop being so opaque, and only advertise with companies with high social credit scores, sorry I mean ESG scores.

If we're being honest with ourselves blocking major trade routes has at least as much economic impact, though it's harder to see/measure.

It may be true that politics have permeated the workplace such that in certain industries and circles it has become important to signal your support for the popular movements of the day for basic job security.

To the extent it is innappropriate, it is equally innappropriate is for the workplace to become the venue for those who hold less popular ideas to tilt at political windmills of their choice, even if they do work at a news company.

Does Ubisoft have to honor that Blockchain though by providing you services in perpetuity?

They might if they contractually agreed to honor it. But even if they were inclined to offer such licenses (lets say consumers everywhere demanded it), there's not many meaningful enforcement advantages of shoving NFTs in the mix.

As a consumer such a contract could (including transferability) could exist without an NFT, and be just as enforced by the (centralized) judicial system or consumers voting with their feet.

I've always wondered whether it would be possible to have some kind of compartmentalized bus.

Some kind of compromise between asking people to cram themselves like sardines against a bunch of strangers, while still allowing people to sit next to their family members and friends.

It's convenient to say a desire to not jam up close to strangers implicates its holder in some terrible character flaw of not caring for ones fellow human. But if you really want to get more people on buses it's a desire we'll have to accommodate and contend with.

"And yet it was built and defended, with the still-unpopular argument that writers are in fact people, and they need to eat, too."

I understand "freelance writer," or "professional writer" as definitions - but in the age of social media, is it accurate to still think of "writers" writ large as a contiguous defined class of special people separate from the general public?

I think the person you're responding to said "for people who don't believe in sex-based personality differences"

Asserting that there are sex-based personality differences is not incompatible with gendered behavior being mostly social or learned.

I disagree, I think the photography prices here are a good example of markets working as intended.

Prices reward people who do work that there is an unmet demand for in society. If society already has an oversaturation of professional photographers (so much so that clients feel they do not have to compete at all), the low price of $0 for professional photography work will hopefully encourage some of these glut of professional photographers (and others looking to enter the field) to pursue another profession where they can add more value.

If Netflix's contractor here has set the price too low, well then no one will apply, and they will have to set the price higher.

So just partially owns, then.

REAL San Franciscans love tents on downtown sidewalks.

Wish I could be as cool as them.

It seems straightforward to me:

* Google has not been able to put together the new features that would justify this flagship cost

* Because they cannot, they should instead focus on their strengths which are simplicity, all around quality, and affordability (e.g. the $349 4a)

Good answer to "What's the difference between LEAN, F* and Dafny?" https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46010923/whats-the-diffe...

Weird how the revolutionary ideas being thrown about here don't extend to just switching to digital art, instead starting and stopping at a moral obligation to give their gallery below market advertising space. Just because it has been less financially successful? Okay...

It's become Schrödinger's social norms.

Keeping your distance? For the exact same social context that could be (A) not invading a woman's space or putting her in an uncomfortable situation or (B) a harmful approach fueled by a paranoic attitude that is unfair to womens' careers. It could be either until a woman observer collapses the wave function.

Giving the government near-total control over our internet access is going to introduce more problems that it would solve.

We're already seeing that Western countries too can be just as censorship happy (e.g. the UK where the government pressures ISPs, and is seeking to enshrine in law, the blocking of a huge assortment of content including such ridiculous things to block as female ejaculation)

Just imagine how easy and unescapable that censorship will be if the government is the ISP itself. We've seen repeated attempts in congress to illegalize encryption the government cannot easily break. District Attorney General Rod Rosenstein hinted just this very month that in wake of the Texas shooting the Trump administration will take a harder line against "unbreakable encryption."

Just imagine how stronger their effort against encryption will be once it's the only thing standing between them and completely blocking your access to information they'd rather you not have?

Let's just settle for net neutrality and incentivizing new cable lines and ISPs, rather than open the "nationalize the web" can of worms.

The market is easily enough to support a mid sized news website, several actually. But it's a saturated market with lots of competition. The amount of reporters willing to write for less if they get to display a feminist slant is multiples more than the amount necessary to satiate the audience who might want to read them

I'm just a lowly project manager, but my understanding from the tech wizards around here and those I work with is this:

It is possible, using the advanced technology available today, to make on your website a button which allows a subscribed user to independently cancel a subscription that was made online.

Through this technology, one no longer has to compose a pleading e-mail to customer service. No need to take on faith the co-founder's confusing promise that they want to make it easy for you to cancel while they simultaneously withhold a "cancel" button, with no stated plans to add one.

I mean, look, if you really don't intend to make a serious amount of dough off of people being too forgetful or busy to unsubscribe from a subscription they no longer want... what's the harm?