While Amazon is awful it isn’t just them. It is a systematic issue with our economic system. Our society constantly makes efforts to keep the poor poor so that they are forced to work for low pay resulting in a cycle of abuse. Basically every public company will end up in the same situation and we see that with every large company. If a large public company isn’t shit the CEO will be fired by the shareholders and replaced with one who makes the company shit.

So yes, avoid Amazon, but also talk to your government representatives. The cycle will always continue until the incentives are changed. To properly exit this shit system we need to change our society and government.

I hear what you are saying. But our society is pretty fucked up if you “deserve” something bad because you bought a product without imaging how the manufacturer can make it worse in the future.

The owners should be able to return the product if something like this happens, no matter how long ago they bought it.

Yeah, I finally pulled the trigger and moved to my own domain from matrix.org. Man, it is just so much faster. Which is sad, because the performance is pretty bad. (Element Web seems to do some per-room request as part of the initial loading screen which is obviously not scalable) but getting off of matrix.org is a huge performance improvement.

That being said there is nothing really wrong with matrix.org. The problem is really public rooms. People will join and spam. It is true of any protocol (have you heard about email?) but Matrix definitely needs to (and they are slowly working on) make it more expensive for spammers.

But holy shit a marvel of marketing. Better be a case study in business school. They had little to no actual implementation for years and years but are still the go-to name for autonomous driving and selling subscriptions to something that doesn’t exist. Absolutely wild.

This is the advantage of decentralization over federation. IMHO the fact that Lemmy is only federated really hurts it. Not so much for user accounts (in theory these can be backed up restored and moved. Not ideal but not awful) but in that communities are tied to servers. When the server a community is on goes away it is hugely damaging to that community.

And I would go so far as to say that nobody who is buying 36 TB spinners is doing offsite backups of that data.

Was this a typo? I would expect that almost everyone who is buying these is doing offsite backups. Who has this amount of data density and is ok with losing it?

Yes, they are quite possibly using tape for these backups (either directly or through some cloud service) but you still want offsite backups. Otherwise a bad fire and you lose it all.

aren’t striping

I think you mean “are striping”.

But even with striping you have backups right? Local redundancy is for availability, not durability.

I don’t think the target audience of this drive is buying one. They are trying to optimize for density and are probably buying in bulk rather than paying the $800 price tag.

In China there is no such thing as a throwaway number (at least outside of black markets). All numbers require ID to acquire.

For the US it would be a bit different. VOIP numbers do exist but they are often also blocked by services (this isn’t black and white but there are services that will quite accurately map numbers into ranges like home/cell/business/VoIP).

But of course the assumption would be that if they start requiring phone numbers for WiFi access the logical next step would be to make all numbers traceable to humans.

I really want to see which ones weren’t leaked. Those are obviously the most secure.

Then they’ll lobby against public WiFi. I was in China recently and (depending on the province) you need a phone number to access public WiFi so that they know who you are.

I’m struggling to see how this actually made money. Because presumably the customer is paying for the delivery (as well as the food that was never ordered). So the fraudsters would just be paying themselves in a complicated way. My best guess is one of the following:

1. DoorDash is subsidizing orders so much that this is profitable overall (the amount they pay the driver is more than the customer pays) seems unlikely.
2. DoorDash is paying the driver multiple times but only charging the customer once. But if this was the case how was this obvious accounting issue never noticed? Shouldn’t the books come out even in the end?

They want to make money off of services, every service they offer requires a Microsoft account to purchase and use. Everyone that they force to make an account during setup is one step closer to paying for a Microsoft service.

There are obviously tradeoffs (less sales of these versions of windows and some users pushed away from Windows altogether among others), but the motivation is clear.

Just looking at the numbers, they are spending $5G and losing $1G. Their subscriptions are growing. So if they grow another 25% they are making money. (Ignoring infrastructure costs which are most likely a tiny fraction of per-user revenue.) They also just launched an Android app. So I think their story is looking pretty good. Not even considering that it raises the value of Apple TV hardware, their other devices and gives them more lock-in for customers in general that seems like a great investment they made.

But your case is wrong anyways because i <= INT_MAX will always be true, by definition. By your argument < is actually better because it is consistent from < 0 to iterate 0 times to < INT_MAX to iterate the maximum number of times. INT_MAX + 1 is the problem, not < which is the standard to write for loops and the standard for a reason.

Huh?

I’ve used Vim for a decade and I would be offended if it made any noise.

Why fail when you can just do the wrong thing “successfully”?

It is mostly about giving users tools to do moderation. So managers of communities can effectively apply policies and make it easy for people to share moderation decisions so that the work can be shared among communities that trust each other’s moderation decisions.

I’m very exited for this. Just boosting a post always seems so impersonal and out of context. I almost always want to add my own message to my followers. I regularly decide not to boost because of this. I would do it a lot more if I can add my own message/context.

This is a case of the streetlight effect. Evaluating the skills needed to do the job is very difficult in an interview setting, so most of the focus going on evaluating skills that are easy to evaluate in an interview (such as people skills).

It isn’t wrong, as all else being equal it is still better to hire the person with better skills that you can measure but obviously is not a strong evaluation of candidate quality.