This, Netflix account-sharing blocking, and the ever increasing amount of streaming platforms (that mean an overall reduced catalogue per platform) leads me to believe we will see a resurgence in piracy.
The system is so blatantly rigged, why would you respect the "intellectual property" rights of people who are fleecing you? At this point I'm just ripping everything worth watching using tools like StreamFab, and encouraging everyone to do the same. Given how cheap local NAS storage is these days, you can easily have all your favorite videos and shows in one place. For bonus points, Plex has much better UI than Amazon.
"Went back" to piracy years ago... I actually pirated movies even when they were available on my Netflix subscription. I unsubscribed from Netflix when they started their descent into Netflix-only content.
If we assume ICE car owners are freeloading on the rest of us (fossil fuel externalities), and them losing some convenience is making their life harder, that is an accurate reading. No one likes paying true costs when they come due, and they've been riding on a discount. We'll do our best to reach parity with combustion vehicles, but there is no guarantee, and some sacrifice might be required.
I've said in numerous other comments that we should provide generous subsidies to ease any transition burdens, but there might be gaps unfortunately.
How many flights have you taken in your lifetime? How many children do you have? Do you eat meat? Do you use multiple monitors when a 14" one would do? Why don't you cycle instead of using an EV? Do you not use solar panels? You could apply this reductionist logic to almost everything in the world.
"Freeloading on the rest of us", "some sacrifice might be required". What a depressing, dictatorial view.
Sacrificing people doesn't seem especially kind. Be kind, eh. When it suits you, I guess.
Great questions, because people should be accountable. I have spent over $500k on clean mobility and energy solutions (EVs, rooftop solar on all of my properties [primary, secondary, rentals]) as of this comment, and offset all of my family's annual carbon emissions using credits from verified direct air capture providers. We keep flights to an absolute minimum (I have put ~110k miles on Model S in 6 years traveling cross country), and again, offset those emissions. We are vegetarians. I have two children, and I cut a check to someone who was getting permanent birth control to buy their unwanted fertility essentially. They had already made the decision ("want to hear something cool? I'm getting my tubes out!"), my action was more symbolic but still important.
If you have no resources, as I've said elsewhere, we should absolutely provide you the means to make choices that both improve your quality of life and are good for the climate. Tax me more, provide the subsidies. More EVs, more heat pumps, more solar panels. If you are of means and make choices dumping externalities on others, clearly you can understand my position that those folks get wrecked. I have attempted to align my actions with my position on the topic out of integrity. I agree contributions towards a solution as well as sacrifice should be proportional.
Could you explain why asking people to pay their fully loaded costs is being a dictator? Don't their rights end where our shared rights being? Is enforcing rights and their boundaries tyranny? Or is it just fair and just? Not rhetorical questions. I am attempting to do my part, and besides that, voting, and perhaps running for office, that's all I can do.
The only way to realistically use a non-tactile button is to take your eyes off the road to look at what you need to press. That's the issue, anything else is irrelevant. I'm glad they're going back to physical buttons, I won't buy a car that doesn't have them.
And well-designed physical buttons have identifiable marks or features on them to help you find the right one purely by touch. The input type (button, dial, lever) shape (round, square edges to the right), dots on the button and location (I change songs in the top left).
> Portland was home to the UX designers who wanted to redesign everything to look nicer but didn't understand how customers used our products
I think that's every single piece of modern software to date. I call them "Dribbblrs", because it's like they take inspiriation from these websites (e.g. Dribbble) that fetishize things that look pretty but are dogshit to use. I really wish it would end but I don't see it happening unless there's a revolution from within the UX community (which I am not a part of).
No it does not. If people took so much care about writing technically correct things (instead of random observation with no substance) as they did whining about irrelevant details the snark wouldn't be needed in the first place
Well, I'd argue that it makes the message more likely to be ignored. I think winning people over is a useful skill (not even on the internet, but in life)
bluetooth headphones/audio have a long list of problems, but I generally don't want to enable bluetooth on my phones at all. It's used extensively for tracking and can log your location at a distance of within a foot from where the beacon is placed or from over 20 miles away. That means I need a headphone jack.
People use headphones for phone calls not just videos. The delay is annoying. Mobile phones already have lag compared to land phones and BT makes it worse.
Isn't that going to be extremely slow? I can only realistically run 7B 5-bit models on my RTX 3060, anything more and it offloads to the CPU. My responses go from almost-instantaneous to 3mins+.
