collegeburner

its common practice to refer to presidents with that title: carter, bush and obama you all hear the same.

tbh i don't know if anything could replace having windows for me. i have felt measurable changes in my mental state from living in places with few small windows and places with lots of large ones.

(i have also lived in places like houston where "some engineering challenges" become pretty absurdly difficult)

yes you can still end up seeing stuff you hate because it's ragebait. so you may "hate it" but you also have a revealed preference that you lowkey like it bc it's something to hate on.

yeah it is but "k1ll your$self" or whatever got through for a while, then it was "unalive", then "un@1ive" or sm when that got filtered, i've even seen "commit queen elizabeth".

trying to filter automatically based on message is a retarded strategy.

there's literally a whole genre of live trolling where you try to get people who are obviously under 13 or close enough to say so and they get banned hella quick usually.

the one i'm thinking of is a full grown (i think) brasilian guy who has his head bent like full backwards and just sits there rocking back and forth and saying "please i need help guys" or sum.

lmaooo facts. you forgot the innumerable 14yr old girl putting on way too much makeup that's half thirst trap and the 8yo fortnite kid raging at his xbox.

btw i'm pretty sure i know exactly which live you're talking about with the house of cards guy. about the only kind of lives i actually like are the debate ones which can be kinda interesting.

"oi m8, let's see ya property loicense!"

kdeconnect is overall buggy ash and i had to stop using it after a year. just not that reliable. taildrop has worked way better.

1. i can run this from my phone easily. using a terminal on a phone is a pain in the ass and increasingly more as android limits apps like termux.

2. tailscale handles key management. this is literally one of its big core competencies btw.

also when did every file copy thing become scp? like if it's not scp why would you expect them to mention it?

no, apple is currently conducting negotiations with the unionized store and there is no contract so presumably they are working on getting that into the contract as part of the bargaining process. which is literally the way unions are set up to work.

messing with existing benefits could be construed as an intimidation tactic but delaying new ones due to going through the union workers just voted in is not, since the union has already been elected this isn't interfering with a vote or sm.

they're not. the point is in a traditional setup the company springs for standing desks as a perk. in a unionized setup it's better to hold stuff back for negotiations. this is the flip side to collective bargaining, you kinda gotta go through "The Process" for everything. there's also the considerations that 1. unions sometimes don't like the workplace just adding perks bc it's perceived as "undermining" the union and 2. unions will always push for more even if you add a perk like new standing desks (bc that's their job) so the workplace kinda has to always push for less so they come to a middle ground compromise.

the experience on all those is way worse. telegram is pretty good but still not there. others arent even close.

snap is the least awful alternative.

it's not "pressure to conform" it's that you will end up gradually pushed out of friend gcs especially. it's not always intentional but there is 100% a certain amount of social isolation that usually results.

(p.s. this is actually a bit better than it used to be, everyone's a lot more comfortable doing a snap gc because it has most of the same features and the UX isn't dogshit like a mixed gc vs imessage.)

from someone who is not too long outside of high school and so maybe remembers this better:

imessage is specifically impactful because it doesn't exclude from individual communication as much as groups. you can still talk to your friends just fine but i remember being left off group texts because the experience is otherwise just so bad. can't add people can't react to stuff whatever.

what usually happens is there ends up being a second gc: 1 is ostensibly the "main one" with everyone in it and the unofficial second is with just blue bubbles. but communication usually ends up in the blue bubble one.

i will add it's not nearly so bad now, most people just do a snap gc but that wasn't the case e.g. 6 years ago.

i disagree with the assumption that it's a solvable problem. people remain fallible and the correct solution is to mitigate our downside by minimizing state power. not disagreeing with the idea that we also need to work on lots of other ways to reduce its power and ability to track people btw.

we have temporarily made peace with dictatorships before. the bigger concern is china wants the #1 spot in world power and we will oppose any nation that tries to beconme more powerful than us.

no, the point is maybe the union wants a 9% raise. if you put new desks in you now pay a 9% raise and new desks. if you keep it for bargaining then maybe you pay an 8% raise and include some other benefits like new desks.

so it makes sense they are keeping it for negotiations then.

it's not P2P so the chance of getting a nastygram to your ISP is basically 0. why would he bother?

because simple, easy-to-use ID lowers the barrier for demanding ID in more places and attacking anonymity. the easier we make it to demand id, the more people will demand it. wanna use a fake name/not divulge your identity? doing something politically sensitive where you may need some protection? just like your privacy? tough shit show your id or GTFO.

i don't want this because then more websites will start expecting strong identity verification. the last thing we need are more attacks on anonymity. at least with a private key i can say i'm joe biden or crazy horse or whoever. i may not be eligible for "government escrow" but who cares.

lmao this is obviously less applicable outside of factual articles.

i agree but there are people who argue "unconscious bias" is at play and interviewers could unconsciously recognize the voice.

like the female example they gave it's still extremely apart from how normal men talk, i didn't have to focus at all. though tbh my first thought was it sounded like a gay male so maybe it sort of works?

i agree the masking was not sufficient. there's no sample of how a masked man's voice sounds but tbh i'd have guessed stereotypical gay male for the masked woman.

like when i talk vs. my female peers i notice my voice doesn't rise in pitch at the end of a phrase, or go creaky. i also notice differences in word choice: it's crazy the number of people i hear saying "perfect" instead of just "thanks" when i send over a document, and definitely more women doing that than men. they also seem to qualify their words more with "i think" or "maybe" preceding a statement.

anyway i'm guessing i could do an ok job of guessing male vs female with them modulated like this.

i wonder if voice masking is actually enough. i (zoomer) know my voice is significantly different from most of my female peers.

idk if this makes sense but i have a more stereotypically "confident" inflection, like my phrases don't rise in pitch at the end, i don't have the "creaky voice" thing etc. i also notice women tend to use more superlative optimistic phrasing ("perfect" vs "good" in response to something) and less definite language (prefacing more often with "i feel" or "maybe").

this is all obv anecdotal but i'm guessing i could guess male vs. female even if the pitches were modulated to be equal. shame there's no example of how male voices sounded modulated.

tbh i got to the point of just assuming that unless someone intentionally writes a descriptive title it's clickbait. they could have put "masking voice gender in interviews showed no significant outcome change". if you aren't intentionally making the title maximally descriptive and information packed, just like any other good writing should be, i'm gonna say it's clickbait.

i mean i'm not super behind cali big tech moving here, that was basically a joke. i think they're pretty toxic and distort the cities they call home which is what happened to SF and is now happening to austin. i think overly-progressive city governments have some fault in both but there's no way past the fact that tech will gentrify literally everyone out of a city, not just the poorest, if it ends up all in one city. i don't really want the entire houston-austin corridor gradually pricing out even the middle class which is where it's going rn.

believe it or not, MBAs and execs aren't picking where they put a campus based on abortion. they continued expanding in SF for many years when it's not a "urbane, pleasant, safe place to live" and the only box it checks is "liberal".

i think the only thing that has changed majorly in the past decade is Texas abortion policy. fact is most tech workers have more than enough money to go fly to another state so probably won't turn down a super high paying job at a big name tech company over it. maybe you will but sounds like you're ideologically very fixed on this. like, i won't go work in states that abuse their citizens gun rights so i get where you're coming from and would personally like some liberalization of state abortion policy. but most people don't have those kind of dealbreaker issues.

we can get past water issues, we'll just start piping it in like y'all did years ago. despite some of the goofy ahh rhetoric from abbot Texas is a leader in renewables and that will probably make it economical to do desalination at scale before other states. we're already pretty used to relying on climate control, and there's finally some movement on getting micronukes up for the grid.

tbh i liked Texas before all the cali types showed up. so i'm not gonna be pressed if they leave. i'd much rather we build up our own innovation scene focused on hard tech, medtech etc. rather than importing the cali "culture".

> petro-Christofascist-kleptocracy

bffr

yep philippines. i guess agree to disagree, i think people should absolutely be able to trivially circumvent financial fraud regulations because preventing them from doing so removes their ability to transact privately. similarly for guns i don't trust the state to know who owns what, like e.g. i want to make sure they don't know who has an AR-15 or standard-capacity mag so they can't actually enforce against existing guns if they pass a feature ban.

just principally i'm opposed to putting additional requirements on how ordinary people operate because a tiny minority might do something wrong. and something about requiring an entity to retain information for potential seizure by the government just rubs my sense of due process the wrong way i guess.

meh only sorta. like, yeah oil is obviously a big deal because it's a valuable resource. but like if something is a huge part of the state's economy and a ton of jobs is working to keep that industry healthy/growing really "being run by it" or is it just good policy?

the good thing is we're stealing all those nice cali tech jobs so it won't be true forever ;)