Facebook doesn't want to be a utility as far as I can tell, they want to be a functional monopoly. They want to be so big that people effectively can't leave the platform even if they wanted to.
And then they would use smaller "social media" platforms as a legal defense, even if they don't compete on content or functionality.
It's definitely has major design philosophy differences that make it scratch a very different itch then dwarf fortress. Both good games, but not really equivalent imo.
RimWorld randomizes difficulty through the game. So when things go crazy the response tends to be Angst against rngesus.
In dwarf fortress when problems arise the answer is almost always that it could have been prevented and or dealt with in many many ways (some that the developer never considered).
Play a different storyteller. ;) Plenty of mods bring with them much fairer storytellers. I like Sara Spacer from Save Our Ship, who scales based on tech level and research completed.
Nobody I know plays the default ones regularly except for Randy, and Randy won't hit you hard enough to break most skilled players.
I bought a set of 1cm element cubes awhile ago. There is definitely a change of perspective of density when you see several things of one generic size, and yet they are dramatically different weights.
I think it's fairly common to see volume and assume weight. And less volume is often assumed to be a structure issue, like expanded metal vs solid blocks of metal.
The basic education concepts at ploy here are well known, just not widely deployed.
Why? IMO it's because of what I think is the sole problem with american education - parents themselves not caring if their kids actually know anything. It's actually common, extremely common, for american parents to think that the point of education is to get a piece of paper (degree) or to get a job. And a large number of the parents that think the point is actually knowing things also put no pressure on the school systems to actually provide that.
Is there evidence that knowing how to do math is actually beneficial to most people?
I think it's easy to criticize when ignoring the possibility that much of what is taught in American schools is actually just useless and very little of it is retained after schooling ends.
What I said applies to all topics. Including ones that you personally value.
As for whether math is useful or not... I'll just say I REALLY wish more of my coworkers knew their math. I work in a factory, and it's useful WAY more often than you may think.
That isn't necessarily true. All you have to do to keep the concept of external soul alive is to accept the idea of simpler souls. Maybe there isn't am irreducibly complex soul.
part of the issue is how fast they want to hire them too. People do not just think of themselves as employees in waiting.
If you are a business that is going to lay off a bunch of people... temporarily... then be sure get an agreement that they will come back.
Imagine you're one of these workers laid off. You move. You find another way to live entirely, another way to pay the bills, another entire path to another entire career. Heck, even if they give you your old job back... even at a higher wage. Would you take it back? It's not an obvious decision.
There is a solution for that. Hire unskilled, or underqualified employees and train them. But that costs money and takes time so of course companies don't want to do that. Then there is the fear that the employee will leave and work for a competitor after you train them. The solution to that is to treat them well enough they don't want to leave. But again, that cost money.
Train people on the job? No no, much better to market to youngsters how much demand there is in a field and how easy it will be to get a job so they spend multiple years in school training for it theoretically, only to find upon graduation that things have changed and the industry no longer needs them. /s
In reality, on the job training has largely disappeared in the last few decades outside a handful of trades. Business has pushed the risk and costs of training to labour and the costs have subsequently skyrocketed despite lower expected return.
Absolutely. And then businesses complain because the external training doesn't do a good enough job preparing prospective employees for their specific needs. Go figure.
Ya. Just because the company would like for people to come back, doesn't mean they have the right to expect them to. The same way that the company chooses to stop paying people, people choose that maybe they'd like to do something else.
Not to mention they've created a huge amount of bad will. Got fired from the trains because "down sizing", or maybe dad did?
Now they're like, "hey come work on the railways" - and the answer is
"fool me once, shame on me..."
Maybe it's not just money, maybe it's not just shitty work conditions, maybe people notice when you treat employees like commodities and choose not to become a commodity.
And then they would use smaller "social media" platforms as a legal defense, even if they don't compete on content or functionality.