If history is any indication, bloodshed. When those with the power get more than they're fair share, the public tends to fix the balance by removing those with too much power.
Holy crap... That's not what frictionless means. That's literally the definition of appropriate levels of security based on risk profile, but even high levels of security should be frictionless, i.e. they should work the same way every time and should be relatively easy to do, which is what 90% of MFA apps are. What's not frictionless is when your security team needlessly causes you to change your very secure password every 90 days because someone told them that was a good idea. It leads to sticky notes and easily cracked passwords that use formulas i.e. Spring2019! Summer2019! And so on like in so many corporations due to poorly thought out security implementation. Longer time before forced password changes coupled with either a physical key or software token that don't have to be remembered are way better.
Only some programmers get paid that and it usually depends heavily on the location you live.
Here's a generic software developer payscale for Boston which comes in lower. Boston isn't exactly a low cost city. While I'm sure there are plenty of devs making more, this is a good example of what I've seen.
I had a salary in my last company and did on call which came with a paid component if we were called to do work off hours. We were working on that in my current company, but they just basically let me set my own hours to deal with that. Work a lot for a few days, go home early on other days. Have some downtime? Expect you might need to work extra some other time. My company doesn't abuse this, although there have been a few really critical months of crunch time in the past few years. It's basically all evened out for me.
Not all of the mass transit in Boston is weather protected. Snow routinely causes train stoppages. The lines are also really old, being dug by hand when street cars and horse and buggy still existed. There's also the face of massive cost increases forcing people to take transit and park, not to mention the increase in commuting time by not getting directly to your location. I've been on some really great transit systems in places like Bucharest and Tokyo. Boston is an unfortunately poor comparison on some lines.
Doesn't sound like you know Cambridge at all. There aren't many under capacity roads, especially when winter snow comes down. What this is going to do is make traffic slower, encourage more bikers who will ignore traffic rules and act unpredictably, and generally muck things up. Cambridge is actually probably a really great candidate for bike lanes with multiple colleges nearby, but let's not pretend this isn't going to absolutelymake commuting worse. Biking into work isn't an option for me. When I come into the Cambridge office it's 5 hours in the car round trip. Nevermind the jerk motorcycles who drive down center lanes, cut cars off, pop wheelies in the highway, etc. I can definitely say the animus bicyclists receive is undue. My wife and daughter have been threatened with vehicles, I've been hit in a crosswalk walking by a car, and I can't even get into how bad it is trying to follow the rules in Boston with pedestrians crossing against the signal while you've got a short green.
Not everyone got a tax cut and the cuts went primarily to businesses and the ultra wealthy. The President also tried to make the cuts look bigger by changing withholding requirements. It doesn't invalidate that most people are ignorant, most people don't even pay any taxes, but if you're moderately well off, have more than one home, and live in a state that actually has a functional state government that provides services to their people, there's a larger possibility that you saw an increase in taxes. No other first world country does taxes the way we do because the IRS already knows how much most people owe.
Thee whole purpose of monopolies an the actual subsidies that they take with glee is to cover these costs. I completely disagree, Congress should compel these people to provide what they stated. If Romania can provide fiber for their rural populations for cheaper than we have there's no excuse for not being able to provide internet in the United States for all but the most remote locations.
Another entirely valid reason is escapism. The world can be a really crappy place. I can say the certain movies/shows have absolutely helped me through some bad times. I've got terminal cancer, sometimes the only way you can really escape the constant malaise of having to forcibly work towards another day is by borrowing strength from the characters on screen.
As to what you're saying about studying the shows I do that too. Gone Girl is a movie that realistically is pretty easy to figure out the twist. But the way that it's written and acted is stunningly wonderful. It's rare to see solid stories elevated.
Comedians have always been and will always be about holding a mirror to society and pointing out the flaws in a way that makes people realise societies flaws, but make the solutions seem comically trivial. I'd wager it's a highly undervalued skill.
Steam was building something new. Quite frankly it's harder to build a crappy platform since the space has already been pioneered. No one is hating on GOG Galaxy.
You have a fair point about many gamers having short memories. Many however do not have short memories. I suspect we're older though.
I'm another person completely different than the OP the only two installers I'll allow on my machine are Steam and GOG. Why? Because Origin was garbage and EA is a terrible company to support. Ubisoft will not compel new to install a game. Rockstar and their stupid ass community requirements even in single player games have made be never want to play another Rockstar game and wishing I could get a refund on games that backported this to. Steam and GOG worked hard for user trust and built it over years, not by what games they have not but how they've constantly tried to listen to users. You can tell that the people running these companies are games themselves and probably use the same launchers. I can promise you there are people at EA who have never played a video game intentionally in their lives. It's a shame too as there are some really good games in their stables.
Excellence is often used as by the vicious to hide their atrocities. Power is not simply the application of power, it's about knowing when to apply the appropriate power. Equality of opportunity is not weakness. Equality of outcome is not guaranteed. The finest line is that those with the power are expected to be responsible for those who have yet to achieve that power. Naked selfishness is weakness as much as naked reliance. He himself created a teacher in Zarathustra and shared his writings with the world. I think you've misunderstood a great deal of what he wrote.
Seems to me the OP is claiming that people who attack white men are weak willed and only seek to subvert the strong willed white man. Not sure how else one would read that as only white men are strong willed and think like masters and everyone else is a weak willed slave.
We had 8 years of Republicans curbing back regulatory oversight, increasing regulatory capture. The sitting President won on "draining the swamp" and proceeded to hire lobbyists to his staff because "they know how the system works" and yet there's been only further deregulation and destruction of government entities. If Americans want it to stop they will stop voting for people who literally base their party platform on destroying government oversight. There was literally an article yesterday about how when the IRS went after the wealthy for tax evasion, their budget was cut by Congress. The solution to this is a political one. Vote in people who believe differently if you want different outcomes. Otherwise quit complaining, you've got the government the people voted for.
That would be the courts. Since libel/slander/defamation is already against the law. It's rather different from being misinformed and retracting the content and doubling down on lying because it's politically expedient. At least it was before this Presidency in the United States. I'm not sure how a purveyor of conspiracy theories being the ultimate enforcer of the law changes that, if at all.
Laying people off is almost never fun. I say almost because sometimes there are people who make everyone around them absolutely miserable for no reason, and in times like that you get to feel like the good guy or gal. Most times though it's a gut wrenching, horrible thing to have to do. You make friends, despite warning yourself to keep a professional distance, you try to limit the fallout when you can, and you know that you're probably next. A lot of times you don't sleep well at night. Sometimes you're tempted to warn people. At the end of the day you're still human. Aside from sociopaths who don't have the ability to feel empathy, it's hard for most people and some people give these hard decisions as the reason sociopaths are often in roles where hard decisions that impact people, it's a benefit for them.
If you add new tires to your Tesla when you sell them you can sell the new tires with it. Try selling your apps when you sell your old iPhone. Your car is also repairable. Your iPhone is meant to be thrown away. (Not an issue exclusive iPhones)
Police protect assets, fire services protect assets, schools are better in wealthy districts, The IRS targets poor and middle class because it's easier. Courts give better outcomes to the wealthy. Businesses are generally started by those with money. Pretty sure that the wealthy use significantly more resources because they have more to protect.
Cancer is the second biggest killer in the US. There is no cure for cancer, any cancer. We can treat it if caught early enough by cutting it out. That requires having health insurance in the first place. Almost half the people who get cancer die from it within 5 years and that number is only that good because we're really good at breast cancer. Not sure cancer is the yardstick you want to use as how "great" the US health system is. Even among cancer patients you see disparities in how the wealth survive versus the poor, basically wealthy people do better. We're rationed the same as Europe, we just ration differently and claim it's because of social darwinism.
While I agree these are services people pay taxes for, Police mostly target the poor, fire departments are stationed closest to the wealthier neighborhoods, emergency services are generally better in wealthier areas, and public transportation in most of the US is generally poor, airline travel being the only thing worse. It's hard to convince someone who isn't of means that raising taxes on them is somehow of benefit to them. We'd be far better forcing companies to pay and freeing up the market for more people to work from home. That would actually solve the congestion issues without punishing the people who can't afford it.
And yet no conservatives seem to be clamoring to rescind oil subsidies or coal subsidies, but the raucous roar comes up at the Republican rallies when something is said about rescinding renewables and bringing back coal. It's literally the platform the President ran on. I don't think it's political to be able to say that the platform a party runs on is something that they support. Am I misunderstanding something here?
I think this is a pretty fair assessment as human nutrition needs can vary wildly based on a variety of factors. Some people obviously have nutritional deficiencies that are best addressed by eating meat. Most people need to eat more veggies. I think the omnivore's dilemma comes closest to a solid diet for humans.
The article is wrong about almost everything. As for extremists, absolutely agree, but this is someone who is making claims not backed up by the science she claims exists. She makes the claim that DHA is required for proper brain growth. It's demonstrably incorrect. The author of this article, despite having a very nice degree and a background in the field purposefully misrepresents the science. She's willfully spreading misinformation to further her viewpoint.
Yes humans are omnivores, no one, including myself said otherwise. I'm not sure where you're getting that from what I said in the comment.