neura

This is a far stretch in trying to hang on to the last thread of the definition of violence.

Why can't you just use the term "domestic abuse" and stop supporting the misuse of well defined words?

Do you think that if you and others use the term "domestic violence" to include non-physical abuse that it just magically changes the existing definition? Why would you even want to support that when there's clearly another term that's both in general use and clearly fits what you're attempting to refer to, by definition?

Maybe you missed the part where the insurance stopped paying anything. If you do nothing, the insurance wins while you still have to eventually pay or suffer other consequences.

The only trick here is tricking yourself into thinking you've won until proven otherwise.

Not saying this is the complete picture, but the first thing I thought of was "Maybe it's just that $75,000 was the bare minimum to break the barrier of some specific level of unhappiness at the time the data was collected from the sample population?" which immediately led to "Also, $75,000 was probably a pretty outdated value well before the data was even published."

IMHO, you're talking about 2 very different things. I would guess that the maps difference was due to devices (not sure if MacOS users even use Apple Maps with any frequency compared to opening up maps.google.com in a browser, but I'm guessing most iOS users are too lazy and complacent to use google maps). Also, it's hard to recognize and understand the differences in the various mapping apps.

OTOH, it's pretty easy to tell the difference in the first few minutes (or first few searches) between various search sites. Heck, the difference in the search engine having a better idea of what you're looking for based on previous searches (or ad related data) alone can make it more compelling to continue using the same search engine.

My personal example is that I try to switch to DDG every so often (maybe several months in between), but I get dissatisfied with the results and start wondering if I'm just getting bad at search or Google knows me better or Google is just better at finding the things that people want in general.

Just the fact (for me) that I consider that Google generally gives me better results makes me wonder if all the talk of Google search getting worse is just complaints based on heightened expectations, feelings or the landscape of content on the internet in general instead of "is Google search getting worse?"

"Instagram democratizes the mental illness that used to only affect child stars and the hollywood famous."

Wow. I have problems with Instragram, but I've never tried to sum it up into a single statement and while this is rather specific and may not include all the problems I _feel_ are there, it really does bring home the main issue, for me. A little snark in there about democratizing, as some people will always put a positive spin on such things, which I feel is totally appropriate here.

Just... The comment could have stopped right there and been as or more impactful (for me). Thanks. :)

I absolutely am not looking to start an argument here, but do you have maybe a link to a discussion or exposition on why CS is an SC? Genuinely curious about the reason for that statement. I have a reasonable understanding of the differences, but for the context of your statement, what qualifies the statement?

Saw this. Really looking forward to checking it out for the very topics being discussed here. I love looking at how different teams implement these details. Is it just faked enough to be visually pleasing or do they really have each visual actor in the world doing the real work. :D Used to love playing with these details in the old version of Pharoah and Caesar.

It understands the rules it was given by its creators. It intends to give a response that follows those rules.

You can argue that software cannot understand, as it is usually associated with intelligence, but than this is literally a piece of software that is said to have artificial intelligence.

Sorry, you're just not going to win this one.

The software lied, intentionally, because that's what it was told to do.

Yeah, I guess it's as black and white as you state. There's no in-between like keeping the per state allotments while still having that allotment be chosen by the people instead of adding another layer in between that is "voting for the people", which I provide in quotes because who actually believes that is happening? "voting on behalf of their supporters", at best.

Your assumption is correct. The record labels are their business partners. Spotify does not dictate the terms while the record labels hold all the popular content.

Still comes back to "can you sell enough keys on your own to make up for the amount of sales you get through Steam, even after the 30%?" It's great if you think you have a hot game or product that will be sought after by a large enough audience vs people seeing a game show up in their feed or on sale or a friend is playing it or however it ends up in front of you on Steam, a game that maybe you've never heard of before and now you're going to buy it.

How do you think they got to where they are? by not believing and not working hard? Valve has been working at what they do for longer than some people commenting here have been alive. Steam has been around for 19 years.

Do you believe developers should be able to use something a company has spent the last 19 years investing in and building... for free or cheap? Is there a competitor in the market that would bring them as much exposure while not charging as much? The only thing I can think of are platforms like EGS, where they basically pay people to sell their games on there, so they can grow the platform.

I haven't done the math myself, but I'm guessing indie developers would be hard pressed to make the same money without using Steam as they do using Steam, even with the "fleecing" you're talking about.

I have a relative like this, but she watches absolutely nothing. She believes some of her family members are out to get her though. She's in an assisted living facility and her phone has been taken away because she has called the police too many times, claiming that one of her family members is breaking in her window, to poison her.

I'm not claiming that's the same thing, but I'm not sure less time watching videos will correct the issue or won't just lead to some other issue.

In the above scenario, I do not understand what they are getting in return.

Are you saying this person should be hired/paid to store and retrieve the information being sought out?

So you are now the gatekeeper?

That... is amazing! Gives me the warm fuzzies. Thanks for posting.

I mean... they don't pay anybody for it, or actually have any sort of fact-checking right now... and they're still one of the most dominant cessp... err, social media sites.

Seems like the first thing to ask yourself there why this is happening at Twitter and if that same situation applies to the company in question.

Why not `semgrep-py`?

Though, as I tried to type that, I typed semgrep.py twice. The dot name really seems like a file extension, though. I'm torn.

Also, first time trying the tool and I love it!

Spoken by someone who clearly does not have ADHD.

I can say that sometimes "things just work" and that's what I'm always searching for. The thing that makes me not feel like "I wish this worked just a little differently".

I used to fiddle with fonts all the time, until I found Monolisa. I haven't fiddled with fonts in a long time.

I've found that for task organizing I have to have 2 levels. My todo lists for various "modes" (work, personal, kids/house), then another completely separate list of things I make at the start of each day. Still don't know of a tool that does that and I've just stopped looking.

Admittedly, I still fiddle with themes, plugins, etc. for code editing. :x Always after that 1 theme that will help me see everything on the screen at a glance without angry text (red text mixed in otherwise subdued tones) and covers all the different file types I use, appropriately. Just typing this out is making me wonder if there's a way to apply a different syntax theme to different file types. Hmm, about to waste another 20 minutes to an hour looking into that, I'm sure.

TL;DR I think the other person that answered this yesterday said it better than me "it's not about numerical gain, it's more about making sure your shoes fit".

This. Simple, succinct and most importantly correct. Thank you for summarizing most of the other answers in 1 sentence. The second wasn't even necessary. ;)

There have been many people trying to get rich quick in previous generations, as well. If it's growing over time, faster than the "work hard and rise to the top" or other segments of the population, it may be because "working hard" in the same kinds of jobs (level of skill, amount of effort required, etc) people were doing 50 years ago is much less likely to get you to the same level of independence and wealth that it would have 50 years ago.

I think this entire discussion is more about opportunities and the common debate is between older generations that think young people have the same opportunities now that they had when they were young VS young people now believing they do not have those opportunities. I mean, is this not the basis for the entire "OK, boomer" response/meme?

When looking at specific success stories, I think the people talking about luck being opportunity have the right of it. Sure, there might be some plan old luck involved and there's surely a large amount of persistence and effort involved, but it does seem rare to hear about what created the opportunity for the success.

Everybody talking about survivorship bias are really talking about how the success story, as told by people involved in the success, are rarely looking to download their involvement and talk about the opportunities they had, but instead want to show how their involvement and the things they did are the key to the success.

| the idea of dark patterns in UI/UX is a relatively new concept

Relative to what? Before the web?

I left one of the first technologies companies I had ever worked for (huge name more than 20 years ago) specifically because they were using dark patterns. Not even in web UI, but in their installer for actual software (which was to be used in conjunction with the web). Specifically, swapping default and representative checkbox states. You know, the "now that we've set them up to uncheck for opting out, we'll show the next box unchecked and the user has to check it to opt-out" trick.

I'm reading this as sarcasm, but while you can "put dinner on the table for even less", it's still very rare (in over 20 years of my experience in the industry) to find a company that pays more than non-profit salaries and you can't find things to feel terrible about. Heck, some of the non-profits I've worked with were some of the most terrible ones.

Well said.

Yeah, I was just thinking about this before reading what you said. Thinking about the possibility of Meta running their own store is a horrifying idea.

This! SO much, this!

This is precisely how I feel about the situation.

The EFF article doesn't seem to provide a solution that keeps the privacy control still in favor of the user while breaking down Apple's monopoly of an app store. Until there's a proposal that includes incentive for companies to protect their customer's privacy (as you pointed out, this is not something you can just control with code, this is something the company has to actively pursue and enforce) while enforcing the freedom of choice and inability for Apple to force high commissions to make apps available or sell anything, really... then what we have is still going to serve a large part of the market in a net positive way.

Yeah, this is the issue I see over and over. There isn't a good alternative available, so the complaint usually comes down to "but if it were free and open and they didn't charge these "commissions" then I'd make more money!" It's all theoretical though, since the only other sizable platform has kind of the opposite problem. Lots of potential customers who don't spend as much money, far more competition and even if you clearly have a superior app, you have to spend more time/money getting potential buyers to recognize that.

It's been shown over and over again, if you're going to build a mobile app and want to make a profit, you build it for iOS first, then if it isn't a huge cost sink, also make it for Android. The people most likely to pay well are iOS users. Why is that? Anybody against Apple will just call the users stupid, but if you really analyze it, most users believe that Apple provides a better platform, better app selection on their app store, etc.

There's clearly still an issue between "Apple wants to protect its customers" and "Apple wants to _protect_ its customers".

Pretty sure this still comes down to developing on Windows vs an OS that has nix internals. WSL is no substitute (yet). If I get anything that's not Apple, I have to use Linux and now I have a completely different set of problems. Even in the MacOS flavor of nix, most things "just work". Linux leaves you with a bevy of choices to be made, most of which I don't know the real effects of and then I have to deal with maintenance on my own.

Target market. Is MacOS a viable target market for Fortnite? Even if you do wish to play competitive games on MacOS... Using the same hardware, the performance has been shown to be worse, in every comparison I've been able to find.

While I think this discussion is moot, as you're claiming this is a reason to start charging for IAP in MacOS apps and Epic has decided not to release new Fortnite seasons on MacOS, because of their beef on iOS, you're also talking about a specialized and high profile game, where most IAP are targetted at mobile specific games. Just look at the backlash that Diablo Immortal is receiving right now. Non-mobile gamers complete reject the style of monetization in mobile games.

Again, is this something you actually believe is true? Apple execs are looking to monetize their desktop OS as a mobile OS? Microsoft is already very carefully trying to do this and it's being pretty unsuccessful. There's a lot of rejection for this aspect of Windows 11. Remains to be seen where it's going to be in 5 years, but for now, I don't think this is where desktop OS's are going.

Back to the real meat of the article, Apple is both doing it's customers a service and a disservice at the same time. What is the solution to that? Let 3rd party app stores on, so that we can go back to no protection against tracking and a store full of garbage? (looking at you, Google Play)