The person I was responing to was concerned only with "starved to death", which is silly.
BTW, almost everyone dies for lack of money for medical care. You can always spend more, and there's always a change it will help. You might want to say that differently. Also, can we stop coming up with complex ways to build charity into every service society provides? It's so wasteful. Some people need charity. Give them charity, to the extent of our compassion.
I'm just someone who really respects life
I'm guessing you're pro-choice, pro right-to-die, pro euthanasia. Sorry if I guess wrong, but that's what you sound like.
Drama queen much? Even in the Great Depression, before there was any kind of social safety net, almost no-one actually starved. The government has no business giving money to anyone, beyond what the democratically expressed will of the people require. If the people want to government to take over for the various private secular mutual aid societies of the 30s-50s, that's OK. But that's not only the government's job if and to the extent the majority want it to be.
The sad failure mode we've entered is assholes voting to give other people's money to charity, rather than compassionate people giving their own. It's not obvious what the fix for that sort of corruption is. Probably the best approach would be to bar the government from sending money from the public treasury to anyone - administer the charity, but fund it with donations, not taxes.
Why should I have to go running around looking for charity for my family? I don't want charity I want something that is part of a government sponsored social net
The world owes you nothing. Feeding your self and the family you created is entirely on you. You're entitled to nothing. But good people may offer charity because they are compassionate, not because you deserve it. Any self-respecting society should have plenty of such compassionate people.
There is no difference between one form of charity and another! It doesn't matter who the handout is from, a handout is a handout. Better to find employment if you're able (obviously, if you're truly disabled, there's no shame in taking charity!). The world keeps changing. Work that was once in demand falls out of demand with that change. I used to drive for a living - clearly there's limited future in that, just like IT support. If you see work dwindling in your specialty, the only sane choice is to start working towards a new specialty, ideally before your current job disappears.
e H1B an auction, where employers bid for them instead of distribution by lottery.
If you mean "allocate by highest-salary first", then that is in fact the proposal Trump made, and is the current bill in the House with bi-partisan support. It also adds as $130k minimum wage for H1-Bs, thanks to a Dem rep from CA.
$130k minimum, allocate by salary. This will fix all but the worst of the exploiters, and make the people with actual talent shortages happy (the worst exploiters just steal the pay back, so it doesn't matter how much).
Are the owners in on this? If not, they might not realize their management is backstabbing them to funnel money to management's friends. You might send the owners a letter about this - the results could be entertaining.
There's plenty of charity in the US to keep your family from actually starving, so that's a bit hyperbolic.
It you're in "IT" you might as well be making buggy whips at this point, and should have an exit strategy. If you're a software developer, there are plenty of jobs to be had automating all the "IT guys" out of a job.
Probably David Hamilton, who recently committed suicide under suspicion of having raped some of the underage girls he photographed decades ago. Perhaps not the best example to be used in defense of photographs of naked children.
Of course he's a witch! He wouldn't have been accused of witchcraft if he wasn't a witch. Stands to reason.
There's just no way he raped as many women as Bill Clinton - unlike Trump, Clinot had the state troopers to round them up for him. Yeah - no one cares.
That average includes the 0-effort asset flips - which is to say, outright scams.
This isn't the phone market. If your game isn't garbage people will pay $5 for the typical indy-fare with nothing inspired in the graphics or mechanics (assuming decent play-time, seems to be about $3 for short games). Games with some original or interesting element and solid art direction (not necessary good graphics, just an interesting look) will sell for ~$10 (assuming a steam sale discounting it from $15-20).
And if you actually have a cool idea and it's not your first game, you can probably get a kickstarter going.
days of publishing games any other way are long gone. Steam has effectively a monopoly on PC gaming. Everything else is just niche noise.
Niche noise is all you need to raise $5000 to get your game on Steam (though I suspect it will end up lower than that, $5000 isn't unreasonable IMO).
Greenlight is a worthless cesspool now. It's gone beyond Sturgeon's Law: 99% of the games there are 0-effort asset flips. It's nearly impossible for a player to find the 1 good game in 100 - and that can't possibly be good for devs either. For example, there have been some amazing games made with Unity, but Unity games have such a bad rep on Greenlight that it's hard to overcome.
The voice in my head... it says "Pull up. Pull up. Pull up." I take the pill to make the voices go away, but they don't, and now I hear "Eject. Eject. Eject."
Please mod AC up. This - so much this. Same complaints about the president, different people complaining - the only real difference is the prevalence of the left of social media, so the complaints echo more in the chamber and seem louder. But it's the same dumb shit as always.
Subscribers, or Patreon, of the donation model the red site uses.
Slashdot is the only ad-supported site I visit regularly other than YouTube, and most of the people I watch on YouTube aren't ad supported (they get paid from Patreon, not YT).
Back when I had a sports car, I stripped the engine down to the point of leaving the head on, then rebuilt it to give better reliability and (marginally better) performance. I suck as an auto mechanic, but everything is straightforward.
If the change needed to browser behavior is straightforward, it seems reasonable that a professional software engineer could do this. Of course, the main fix - limit the number of parallel connections - is already configurable in FF and IE.
Autoplaying videos are the bane of my existence. Nothing should should autoplay, ever, and it shouldn't require a browser plugin to prevent it.
I hate to say it, but autoplaying (content) videos are often serving the needs of the target audience for a sit - people with an attention span shorter than a goldfish.
Much as I hate that shit, I can defeat it and the target audience (e.g., of tabloid news sites) needs to help to know where the content is - it's not like they're going to read words.
It bothers me a lot less than advertising, which serves no-one.
If TPB had a Tor Onion site, there are no exit nodes in that story. Onion sites have proven quite weak against nation-state attackers, but I bet the tech stands up well against corporate attackers (to the extent a difference still exists, I guess).
Erh... we live in the world of Steam and Netflix. Unless you absolutely MUST see the latest blockbuster DAMN RIGHT NOW (and, bluntly, I can't even think of one that I want to see at all, let alone now) there are quite a few venues available that are way less of a hassle to get what you want than TPB.
Forget about the latest blockbuster - it's the old library. Netflix and Hulu have maybe 1% of the content they should. The MAFIAA still seems to think there a vast fortune to be made in streaming rights for the likes of Hogan's Heroes and Gilligan's Island. Older shows come and go, but mostly go, in streaming availability.
Slashdot Mirror
The person I was responing to was concerned only with "starved to death", which is silly.
BTW, almost everyone dies for lack of money for medical care. You can always spend more, and there's always a change it will help. You might want to say that differently. Also, can we stop coming up with complex ways to build charity into every service society provides? It's so wasteful. Some people need charity. Give them charity, to the extent of our compassion.
I'm just someone who really respects life
I'm guessing you're pro-choice, pro right-to-die, pro euthanasia. Sorry if I guess wrong, but that's what you sound like.
keeping it's citizens alive
Drama queen much? Even in the Great Depression, before there was any kind of social safety net, almost no-one actually starved. The government has no business giving money to anyone, beyond what the democratically expressed will of the people require. If the people want to government to take over for the various private secular mutual aid societies of the 30s-50s, that's OK. But that's not only the government's job if and to the extent the majority want it to be.
The sad failure mode we've entered is assholes voting to give other people's money to charity, rather than compassionate people giving their own. It's not obvious what the fix for that sort of corruption is. Probably the best approach would be to bar the government from sending money from the public treasury to anyone - administer the charity, but fund it with donations, not taxes.
Why should I have to go running around looking for charity for my family? I don't want charity I want something that is part of a government sponsored social net
The world owes you nothing. Feeding your self and the family you created is entirely on you. You're entitled to nothing. But good people may offer charity because they are compassionate, not because you deserve it. Any self-respecting society should have plenty of such compassionate people.
There is no difference between one form of charity and another! It doesn't matter who the handout is from, a handout is a handout. Better to find employment if you're able (obviously, if you're truly disabled, there's no shame in taking charity!). The world keeps changing. Work that was once in demand falls out of demand with that change. I used to drive for a living - clearly there's limited future in that, just like IT support. If you see work dwindling in your specialty, the only sane choice is to start working towards a new specialty, ideally before your current job disappears.
e H1B an auction, where employers bid for them instead of distribution by lottery.
If you mean "allocate by highest-salary first", then that is in fact the proposal Trump made, and is the current bill in the House with bi-partisan support. It also adds as $130k minimum wage for H1-Bs, thanks to a Dem rep from CA.
$130k minimum, allocate by salary. This will fix all but the worst of the exploiters, and make the people with actual talent shortages happy (the worst exploiters just steal the pay back, so it doesn't matter how much).
You can't be that dumb - you must see that legal immigrants and illegal migrants are not the same category. Of course you do - you're just lying.
Believe me, all the legal immigrants who've gone through all the shit you have to go through to get a Green Card know the difference!
Are the owners in on this? If not, they might not realize their management is backstabbing them to funnel money to management's friends. You might send the owners a letter about this - the results could be entertaining.
There's plenty of charity in the US to keep your family from actually starving, so that's a bit hyperbolic.
It you're in "IT" you might as well be making buggy whips at this point, and should have an exit strategy. If you're a software developer, there are plenty of jobs to be had automating all the "IT guys" out of a job.
Probably David Hamilton, who recently committed suicide under suspicion of having raped some of the underage girls he photographed decades ago. Perhaps not the best example to be used in defense of photographs of naked children.
Of course he's a witch! He wouldn't have been accused of witchcraft if he wasn't a witch. Stands to reason.
There's just no way he raped as many women as Bill Clinton - unlike Trump, Clinot had the state troopers to round them up for him. Yeah - no one cares.
That average includes the 0-effort asset flips - which is to say, outright scams.
This isn't the phone market. If your game isn't garbage people will pay $5 for the typical indy-fare with nothing inspired in the graphics or mechanics (assuming decent play-time, seems to be about $3 for short games). Games with some original or interesting element and solid art direction (not necessary good graphics, just an interesting look) will sell for ~$10 (assuming a steam sale discounting it from $15-20).
And if you actually have a cool idea and it's not your first game, you can probably get a kickstarter going.
days of publishing games any other way are long gone. Steam has effectively a monopoly on PC gaming. Everything else is just niche noise.
Niche noise is all you need to raise $5000 to get your game on Steam (though I suspect it will end up lower than that, $5000 isn't unreasonable IMO).
Greenlight is a worthless cesspool now. It's gone beyond Sturgeon's Law: 99% of the games there are 0-effort asset flips. It's nearly impossible for a player to find the 1 good game in 100 - and that can't possibly be good for devs either. For example, there have been some amazing games made with Unity, but Unity games have such a bad rep on Greenlight that it's hard to overcome.
The voice in my head ... it says "Pull up. Pull up. Pull up." I take the pill to make the voices go away, but they don't, and now I hear "Eject. Eject. Eject."
Please mod AC up. This - so much this. Same complaints about the president, different people complaining - the only real difference is the prevalence of the left of social media, so the complaints echo more in the chamber and seem louder. But it's the same dumb shit as always.
It's not the 400x400 images people are complaining about. It's the 20 MP images.
Didn't see you upthread where people were discussing the limits of ad blockers, and wondered if you were doing OK. But here you are.
Subscribers, or Patreon, of the donation model the red site uses.
Slashdot is the only ad-supported site I visit regularly other than YouTube, and most of the people I watch on YouTube aren't ad supported (they get paid from Patreon, not YT).
Back when I had a sports car, I stripped the engine down to the point of leaving the head on, then rebuilt it to give better reliability and (marginally better) performance. I suck as an auto mechanic, but everything is straightforward.
If the change needed to browser behavior is straightforward, it seems reasonable that a professional software engineer could do this. Of course, the main fix - limit the number of parallel connections - is already configurable in FF and IE.
Oh, wow, that kicks ass. No joke, lack of mouse support was my main problem with Lynx. I'll have to check out eLinks.
Autoplaying videos are the bane of my existence. Nothing should should autoplay, ever, and it shouldn't require a browser plugin to prevent it.
I hate to say it, but autoplaying (content) videos are often serving the needs of the target audience for a sit - people with an attention span shorter than a goldfish.
Much as I hate that shit, I can defeat it and the target audience (e.g., of tabloid news sites) needs to help to know where the content is - it's not like they're going to read words.
It bothers me a lot less than advertising, which serves no-one.
Which doesn't work so well once the majority of commercial news-editorial sites
The majority of commercial news-editorial sites are poorly-written fiction and highly repetitive and uninspired op-ed. Nothing of value will be lost.
Handy rule of thumb:
* 3 ns/m - light in a vacuum
* 4 ns/m - signal on a copper wire
* 5 ns/m - light in fiber-optics
If TPB had a Tor Onion site, there are no exit nodes in that story. Onion sites have proven quite weak against nation-state attackers, but I bet the tech stands up well against corporate attackers (to the extent a difference still exists, I guess).
Erh... we live in the world of Steam and Netflix. Unless you absolutely MUST see the latest blockbuster DAMN RIGHT NOW (and, bluntly, I can't even think of one that I want to see at all, let alone now) there are quite a few venues available that are way less of a hassle to get what you want than TPB.
Forget about the latest blockbuster - it's the old library. Netflix and Hulu have maybe 1% of the content they should. The MAFIAA still seems to think there a vast fortune to be made in streaming rights for the likes of Hogan's Heroes and Gilligan's Island. Older shows come and go, but mostly go, in streaming availability.
Mean nothing at all to a terrorist organization. Body count, and promise of future body count is all that matters.
Advertising is advertising. Sex and death.