Yes, your entire post screams "older generation knows better, newer generation stupid losers" in unifying accompaniment with my initial caveman comparison. It's always interesting seeing the divide of generational vs cultural values from the point of view of people in the country, and the absolute insistence that their values represent one side vs representing the other. If you're observant, you get to witness in real time the cold and deafening silence of society moving on and losing interest with whatever hill-of-the-week people want to dramatically die on through over performant thrashing about. I mentally frame this timeline and context to be the equivalent of a child tantrumming in a grocery store while everyone else is just focused on shopping and going home, except I get to stop and point and laugh every once and a while in moments like this one. The death of stoner culture and commercialization of THC as a product instead of a lifestyle was pretty similar.
Drinking is an archaic caveman activity that newer generations dont really care about, observed on a global trend. GenX and older millennials ring this bell continuously for a crowd that doesn't care. Shouldn't you focus on issues that actually impact and hurt people instead of trying to point out some "inconsistency" about the usage of the land of the free slogan that no one ever brings up in any conversation about america?
Eh, not even "some americans", mostly just rural country hicks on your side that survive off the finances of better run states disproportionally subsidizing them. I agree, no big loss.
Treating users like adults and allowing them full control over setting system capability and app launch restrictions on devices (and even implementing fully optional, widely blocking restrictions as "parental safety options") was the industry taking it seriously. You considering the freedom of choice to the user as disastrous and the lack of heavily restricted lockdowns by default as "refusal to take concerns seriously" is just a reflection on your attitudes about other people, not any real argument for improving privacy or safety. You ARE a morally panicked maniac if your only grossly offensive things you want to keep pretending are horrifying examples have absolutely nothing to do with the invasion of privacy of children and more to do with puritanical outrage on children accessing adult material.
Intentionally misinformed citizens continued to charge the streets demanding "essential services" like barber shops need to be reopened and to intentionally dismantle and resist against all government protections on public safety during the pandemic (like wearing a mask during an active spreading event), literally while their grandparents and relatives slowly and painfully died on respirators in hospitals largely agreeing with the same notion of covid prevention measures being "pointless". They then attacked the institutions that provided either medical treatments or provided assistance, and continue to promote that culture. Lemmings to a cause they dont understand for a message they know is false.
That is to say, there's always someone ready to make zealots die for a cause. IMO, that change would only shift in favor of the most radical extremists who see human life as expendable rather than cause anyone in power to think twice about pushing their ideologies onto masses.
As long as we're reciting unrelated anecdotes to attempt emotional appeal over anything of substance, "Chat" has also driven young children to suicide. No one in their lives would have paid as much detail into reaffirming every negative thought pattern they had until they ended their own lives as much as an emotionless token predictor LLM running 24/7. They got their nihilism and idealization pushed back at them in a clear, cold tone they would have never gotten from docs, reading papers, reading textbooks. I dont think their outcomes were as amazing. Their mental condition wasnt even as rare of a circumstance to properly handle and treat, yet it failed at a fatal level.
I dont know why asking to not have LLMs shoved in your face in every facet of society always has to be rebutted by a subjective miracle experience akin to openai PR statements. You can have these conversations with chatgp- oh, your friend "Chat" without it being proliferated to education platforms. These concepts aren't in conflict with eachother, yet by coming to defense of their use as a mandated platform you want to brush away critique for reasons that are unknown to anybody else. Go ahead and keep talking to "Chat", maybe let the people suffering at the hands of low quality slop have their voice and chance to speak?
Yeah, which is a reasonable statement to make on the website TrainHackersAndPassAvoiders.com. I think its appropriate if you consider yourself in the culture to be reminded of the norms everyone in that culture typically follows.
No such walk back exists btw, especially when he never made a definitive claim to the political allegiance of the killer. The only people doing a walk back here are the show execs allowing Kimmel to return. The groups of people who did make claims about the politics of the killer, i.e. the president and the presidents cabinet did so immediately after his death with no evidence and have shown to be wrong in their initial assertion, which has now been swept under the rug. Pathetic display all around holding a late night comedian to a higher standard than the president tbh, more than "a great outcome".
I'm kind of confused by your post, as if you didn't read your parent poster at all and wanted to use the chance to write a lecture about CS101 concepts. Can you explain how your uniform code argument fits in at all with their example of introducing multiple other system components in a PR because they lacked the knowledge to add it in the correct area? Every piece of code they brought to that PR could have followed a uniform standard and still be considered a failure at understanding proper system architecture for their app, which is the discussion everyone else is actually having.
It's honestly a shame that comments from people like you will be silently forgotten, when your unending ceaseless discharge of excuses to sweep the rug for the current status quo should be something that you should never be allowed to forget. I guess you have a point though, a flame left unextinguished will only grow and that was the result here. Not too many outcomes remain when you only add more fuel, but there is always another way to solve that problem :)
Indifference is acceptance of the status quo, though, yeah? Whether that be on a conscious level of active avoidance or on a subconscious level of never mentally aligning it as a priority to build further understanding to form a thought-out opinion.
There actually is a binary view on your stance against things when you see unfettered hate spread by others and choose (at some level) to not have an opinion. We've seen it before, we see it now, we'll see it again.
Not everyone has the same privilege as you to remain head under sand until there's no commotion left to dodge.
It's a nice change of pace around here when people intentionally make themselves the butt of the joke by acting like extremely common phrases are somehow foreign to them. "Lived experience" immediately adds more detail and context to how they obtained their knowledge by explicitly referring to first hand involvement and direct experience rather than potentially from second hand sources or studying, but here you are making a smarmy reply pretending that it was somehow more confusing to the benefit of the rest of us who might take your attempt at quips as humorous. Thanks for the laugh!
Couldn't far left progressives run their own candidates to win their own elections on issues without siphoning unreciprocated one-way support from the Democrat party? Given the toxic outcomes of supporting purity testers who give ultimatums similar to yours on political issues completely unrelated to the average voters life, theres likely no mainstream party that would align with a platform of virtue signallers that dont intend to create any meaningful policy, so to claim your position is popular is somewhat is a misnomer. Saving people is a popular concept, sure, but it's not easily perceptible to the rest of us that the group taking the strategy to ensure the most suffering for the Palestinians possible in our voting cycle is the one attempting that feat.
That's funny, I dont see anywhere in the article or the comments where someone is claiming that this was the biggest problem that they faced. Want to post a quote to give context to your nonsequitor?
When you realize that your imagined disappointment is a proxy for jealousy, some of the subtle seething whimpers delicately packed into your every reply on the topic might start to subside. You're upset that people wasted their time developing a specific skillset that is a useless unfruitful timesink for the vast majority was ultimately replaced by a simple to use tool at an extraordinarily faster rate. We never needed the 'ghibli artstyle' to tell ghibli stories, we needed the direction and tone and messaging his works created to be in a consumable format that captures people. Languishing on the experience being cheapened because the landscape of art presentation has changed is a regressive stance that has no basis in reality and many counterpoints.
Here's the oft repeated analogies that never have a proper response to hopefully help guide you out of your self created mental labyrinth, but trigger warning! (for people like you): photographers, printing press, classical music.
What if your successes and failures were due to an external force entirely outside of your control? Would you feel accomplished if things you considered personal achievements were knowingly received due to e.g. influence of being in a higher social and economic class despite lacking the same level of merit as your other colleagues? Should you feel personally defeated if you created a professional project that you couldn't bring to financial viability?
Attaching positive sentiment to the process of personal growth over percentage of success attempts allows you to build a framework of understanding to see where your sphere of influence extends to and where you can focus and continue attempting next to overcome your hurdles. You can obviously be disappointed something bad happens in relation to your efforts, but stepping back without attaching emotions to the situation allows a glimpse at the true impact of your contributions. That's part of my understanding, atleast.
The article attacks the notion of acceptance testing on websites due to a nebulous fear that good != perfect and testing against the moving target of advertisements is too time consuming and potentially misleading, and instead suggests to test+rate adblockers based on a set of hand picked criteria that suits the product they're advertising. Unsurprisingly, half of the reasons are due to the advantages of adblock being first class native in their product vs a second class extension.
It sure isn't hard to be #1 in some category if you get to define it, but the comparison is kind of muddled for me when you consider the significant amount of time and effort towards maintaining and monetizing an entire platform of security vs maintaining an extension on an already popular platform. Harm reduction isn't a zero sum game.
She wraps up the video and unofficially tells people to leave via 'let me know in the comments', then speaks unemotive capitalist brand advertisement speak about a product, and the video ends. I honestly can't see the merit in your performative outrage here. It's very clearly known why people take advertisement deals, and its placement here is after all the content concluded.
You can find ways to dismiss opinions you don't like, but targeting individual contributors that use sponsorships to maintain or alleviate financial stability is an interesting attack. I guess if that's your only critique, you have no claims to any other negative critique about her points? Just a literal ad hominem? "What happened" to actual discourse?
Hopefully, it's to help enable their success and wellbeing in such a way that it gives them steps towards becoming self-sufficient. Your tone is slightly crass, but you're not wrong that enabling bad behavior in your children is in opposition to your goals as a parent. If you can reason that your nourishment of resources gives them opportunity without becoming a direct dependence and the cost to yourself isn't too high, I don't see it being a problem. Essentially, it varies on how you see your role as a parent and your relationship with your child.
Stimulants also 'increase ADHD-symptoms' for individuals that don't have ADHD, so I don't think the sentiment was attempting to address side effects of irrelevant cohorts.
This would be a stronger point for me if the main developer had already apologized for promising things they couldn't deliver on as main tenants for bringing players to the game, but I can see looking online that this isn't the case even as of 2025. Rather than engage the community continually dismissing intentful lies as 'drama around launch', I'd rather spend my time and energy on supporting platforms that value honesty and transparency.
But, I don't dismiss it as a fun videogame. I don't think cyberpunk 2077 is a bad game still either, but the reframing by these communities of legitimate problems as petty grudges turns me away from wanting to support them entirely. I don't value that type of conduct from a game company.
Ironically enough, that's somewhat part of their point. They're lightly mocking the parent poster who wants to erroneously correlate human intuition on what "looks" or "feels like" the obvious problem despite it having no relation to the outcome. There's absolutely no solid conclusion anyone can draw from their story about why they called for the car wash vs the expensive tv, but they wanted to pretend that it's a clear sign of fault in their fraud detection system versus any plausible explanation. I could very easily craft a narrative to flip your expectation of what should be the 'right' outcome, and in the end it's still completely irrelevant to the topic of security.
Which is to say, if someone used a random number generator and received 12345 and then huffed online about how it isn't generating 'real' random numbers in a security thread, you would be right to second guess anything they had to say if they start with an immediately false premise.
I can't even begin to tell you how hard I unexpectedly laughed at your comment denoting a perceived lack of respect using an extremely commonly accepted scientific dating measurement. Nothing negative noted about any other piece, just a single cherry picked highlight to allow you to demonstrate socially acceptable puritan outrage when given the chance, even on something as insignificant as following common scientific processes. Very culturally relevant. Thanks for the entertainment!
That's strange, I don't see anywhere where they're mentioning anything about questioning the legitimacy of democracy in any country from their post. Want to quote directly what statement you think you're replying to here? Or do you think your statement isn't a goalpost shift?
It's an indicator to the amount of time one has spent on coping and accepting the inconvenient truth about their past hobbies that they fervently lie to themselves and others about.
It's not a mystery to anybody else why they immediately switch interests after finally reaching stability to 'do the thing they've always wanted to have time to do' and glorified multiple years of their adolescence engaging in: they aren't interested in it as much anymore, or were never actually that interested in it. It's weird that they'll always be the last to figure it out.
The compromise is ofcourse that you're working the majority of the time remote and can reasonably accommodate one of these trips if the date is known in advance. I had a similar experience at a workplace I've had with known "onsites" that facilitated several of the business units at the same time, holding meetings and small get togethers to allow some face to face time. Afterward, optional events were suggested to spend time with teams if you had the flexibility, like meeting for a bigger group dinner or doing a meeting specifically with your team.
I don't think it's nearly as 'tech startup burnout' culture as you're envisioning here, people travel for work functions regularly in other sectors of work. Nearly all my aforementioned coworkers on my team had children and lives that they were able to allow their temporary separation from. I dont think it's anyone else's responsibility to fix but your own if making accommodations and planning to meet other people makes you stressed.