Remove the ads and you then have storyline peaks and troughs which are not needed, which will break the immersion, leading to a worse outcome.
1,336 karma · joined October 26, 2011
Remove the ads and you then have storyline peaks and troughs which are not needed, which will break the immersion, leading to a worse outcome.
Dobelli sums it up best:
A simple example is the number of new orgs still running daily live blogs of current events trying to generate hype.
I expect if we looked elsewhere, there would be an uptick in engagement in moderated, thoughtful sources such as podcasts, substacks, etc (and of course plain social).
It's not OK to be a dick about it and harass them.
The author owes you nothing.
I’m reminded of a jingle I heard years ago..
It’s ok to not like things, but don’t be a dick about the things you don’t like.
I know many highly successful people didn’t go to university and this why is doesn’t matter.
To propose otherwise implies that all similar actions/statements made in a similar way are not made by the company, which is both ludicrous and also causes Google to not exist.
Many will improve, with guidance.
Those that don’t will blunder along, wondering why they can’t make it in the world.
On aggregate, junk email, enabled by disrespecting marketers and ongoing minimisation such as your comment, will waste months.
This entire thread has stories of broken corporate culture causing people to leave the company and somehow you’re translating that as win for HR?
In most cases, HR aren’t the ones “dropping” you (it’s your manager). They’re the ones ensuring it gets done in a way that least disruptive to the rest of the org.
The person who chose to put it into _their_ code took ownership of its ongoing maintenance in their instance of its usage (presumably because they felt that would be less work than entirely diy).
There is no puppy here.
1. You have no idea about teenagers.
2. You have no idea about the causes of the opioid crisis.
Also, I did not conflate the two which you appear to think I have done.
The hubris of youth is useful for bringing change, but experience shows that often the effects of that change are poorly understood and often cause significant issues.
The opioid crisis is also the fault of all those pesky addicts who chose to get themselves addicted and it’s not at all on Purdue.
Right?! /s
If this was business as usual, that wouldn’t have happened.
Put another way, it’s less accurate than a device that’s already less accurate than finger sticks.
Given this info, I’m not sure this version is practically useful yet in terms of accuracy.
Many of my peers had kids, as did many people who moved to Australia to work with us.
I can’t speak to your circumstance, however in 13 years I’ve never seen an instance of what you described.
If you think offices are going away, you're betting against decades of history where people work together in meatspace. If you think they do that because they can't get their work done virtually, you've fundamentally misunderstood both humans and also many of their own life circumstances.
Some people _in some industries_ can work from home. For many, that's not feasible. There is no "one way".
Not surprised the Borg don’t get it. Right now I have my uncle nearby and he knows at least how to use a computer.
Things are going to get real fun when he leaves and my 75yr mom is on her own with the tech.
What really amazes me though is how they now treat changing recovery options as signal that the account is compromised.
Google Accounts Team: Users must have a way to recover their account!
Google Security AI: Changing recovery options is a sign of a hack! Shut it down!
Is there a new Conways Law, when an AI is involved?
"Your AIs will ignore product goals only optimise for the outcomes of the department they're created in"
Despite having access to the password, recovery account _and_ the telephone (when my mother is awake), I'm now locked out.
Very frustrating and a salient reminder who you should not trust Google with anything of value.
On the upside, Given they’re on OS 14.4 and support airplay 2, I should get a decade more out of them.
Pay money, problem goes away. Solutions will be found as the price goes up to make alternatives viable.
I'm merely commenting that I'm reasonably convinced they're (in general) removing news and politics from the platform because its _in their interests_ to do so.
Considering the wider issue faced in Australia at the moment, its fair commentary and sarcastic responses don't contribute to the discourse.
If they have to decide between regulation that stifles their business or slightly reduced engagement, they’ll pick the latter.
I have no evidence to back this, however given that it causes them a huge amount of pain and (IMHO) newsfeeds are substantially better when there is no/heavily reduced political fighting between strangers, I can see only upside to this if it happens.