• 1 Post
  • 45 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle





  • I agree. The best part of the fediverse is the diversity.

    However, for someone who doesn’t speak this language, having it marked as English content is not helpful. Would be very nice to have content properly tagged as the actual language it is in, so that users can opt to see content in languages they understand, would be great.

    I don’t have a language filter on, so this wouldn’t affect me, but language tags and filters exist for this very purpose, so it would be nice to see them properly used.


  • We just don’t make tech for old people the way we should.

    My mother in law says things like “Wow, your son is just so good with computers.” She was impressed at how “tech savvy” he was because he was able to change the brightness on her phone for her so she could show him a picture better.

    A lot of our UIs are built for absolute no-thinking usability. How would you propose changing the brightness on a phone that would make it more “old people friendly”. It’s not a matter of difficulty. She just doesnt remember these things, and a different flow may not necessarily be remembered either.

    And I’m not saying its her fault or that she’s bad because of it. She was raised learning how to do and remember things a certain way and that has necessarily changed over the years.

    A phone can do a lot of things, so unless you want to have 100 apps on your home screen, you’ll have to group some together. For instance, putting WiFi into a Settings app. Having every individual setting just available on the home screen potentially complicates things even worse by being overwhelming.

    Genuinely curious how you think things like this could be redesigned to be more old people friendly.



  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoFacepalm@lemmy.world"For employers"
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    25 days ago

    Axios’s target demo is the employers, not the affected young people.

    This is an article about “if you don’t care about other people, stop and think about how it affects your bottom line.” It’s meant to be a way to attempt to instill some pseudo-empathy into the sociopath business types.

    When you are trying to talk sense to dense people, sometimes you have to say things that don’t tone well with reality in order to reach them.



  • It doesn’t make sense. It’s barely even a dog whistle, it’s just a real whistle but stupid.

    She’s a TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist). She is basing her argument on “I’m a Feminist, I fight for women’s rights!” so that she sounds progressive and righteous if you aren’t paying enough attention. (Thus the “dog whistle” part)

    The “sex-based” bit is the trans exclusionary part though. She has decided that she gets to decide what is a “real” “woman” and she has decided that “women” are only those people born with a vagina (thus the “reducing women to their genitals” comment).





  • According to Debian users, “stable” means “unchanging” and not “doesn’t crash or have bugs” … If you still ship 100% of the changes but just delay them by 2 weeks, you have the same number of changes. So by the Debian definition of “stable”, no, it is the exact same as arch.

    By the everyone else definition where “stable” means “doesn’t crash or have bugs”, then also no. Shipping buggy code 2 weeks later doesn’t reduce bugs. And if you use the AUR at all, then things get worse, I’ve found, as the AUR pkgbuilds expect dependencies to match current up to date Arch repos.

    tl;dr - no


  • To help you better understand, the way I see it, every time I do something that financially benefits <Company>, I assume I am giving money to the executives/owners/etc.

    For example, if I spend $30 on a Harry Potter book, I assume JK Rowling gets $0.10 of that (i dont know how it works, but lets assume), and she spends a substantial portion of her income on anti-trans rights. If we assume anywhere near 10%, then me giving her 10 cents is the same as donating 1 cent to anti-trans rights. Is Harry Potter a good enough book that I am willing to donate money to hate groups to obtain it? Personally no. Other people may look at it and say “It’s only $0.01, and I really like the story!” and think it is worth it. That’s up to you where your threshold is for when the good outweighs the bad.

    Contributing legitimacy to something can financially benefit it. Even if I never spend any money on Firefox (for example), user metrics allow them to make bargains with Google to get more money in exchange for default search status. So me using Firefox gets money for Mozilla. And if Mozilla was spending that money on hate groups, I wouldn’t want to be involved in that.

    Yes, I am aware that basically every company out there is super shitty. And giving money or support to almost any major corporation is basically funding hate groups in some way. But when the CEO is loudly outspoken about these things, I’d very much rather just swap to a brand that at least isn’t outwardly proud of it’s stupidity. Unless the other options are just as bad and I need a thing: if my local ISP was run by murderers, I still need internet. That’s not something I’m willing to compromise on. But I do have other choices in browsers and Brave doesn’t have any features I can’t live without.

    So to answer your question: it does not reflect on the product quality, but it does impact how much quality I demand from a product.




  • I know you didn’t ask but an opportunity to info dump is always fun.

    Shorting is basically borrowing stock from someone, selling it. and then buying it back later before the person wants their stock back. Since (mostly) all shares are equal, as long as I return to the same stock, there’s no reason to hold onto a specific share.

    If a stock is going down, if I borrow a share for a week, sell it for $100, then in 6 days buy it for $50 and return it to you, then I’ve just made $50.

    It’s a way to make money when the stock market is going down, but is often riskier because with buying stock, you can just hold indefinitely. If I buy a $100 share, and the price goes to $0. I just lost $100. The most I can possibly lose is $100. (edit: and I sell at any point in the future when I decide. Could be 1 week, could be 30 years.)

    But when shorting, you have to return the shares to the actual owner at some point, and since you sold the shares, you MUST get them back. But if I sold your $100 share, and in 6 days it is now $10,000 (this wouldn’t happen, but for example), and I don’t have $10,000, now I can’t return your share to you, and I’m in REAL big trouble. The amount of money I can lose is technically infinite, and since I don’t have infinite money to lose, it probably just devolves into legal issues.