my_hat_stinks

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Trans men and castrated men exist, I don't think it's the balls.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I did already back up the claim with a source, but okay:

US: Senior 128k USD, mid-level 94k USD
CH: Senior 118k CHF (~139k USD), mid-level 95k CHF (~112k USD)
DE: Senior 72k EUR (~80k USD), mid-level 58k EUR (~65k USD)
NL: Senior 69k EUR (~77k USD), mid-level 52k EUR (~58k USD)

Yes, US and Switzerland are outliers.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (5 children)

100k USD per engineer assumes they're exclusively hiring from US and Switzerland, that's not a general "developed country" thing. US is an outlier.

[–] [email protected] 222 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I leave on time, how is that an insult? I'd be much more insulted if someone asked me to work for them for free. That's what unpaid overtime is.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When I was in school the less well-off kids got their lunch free. There was definitely no equivalent to a "marker" the linked article mentions, unless you include the lunch ticket. I was actually kind of jealous at the time, I didn't understand why I had to pay when I didn't bring my own lunch and they didn't.

Singling out kids because their parents can't afford food is kind of fucked up.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

A little ham-fisted, sure, but if you think it's irrelevant you evidently didn't take any time to actually think about it (you did also reply instantly, so I'll take that over you lacking reading comprehension).

I'll simplify.

Digital piracy is illegal copying of unlicenced content.
Alice creates content.
Alice licences the content to Bob.
Bob decides to distribute the content with advertisements from Charlie.
You download the content.
Charlie does not pay Bob.
You did not breach any licences.
You did not pirate the content.

And just to further clarify, Alice is the person who made a video, Bob is Youtube, Charlie is an advertiser. Your argument is not an ad is piracy if "the advertisement company [hasn't] paid the content creator." The advertiser pays the distribution company, and the relationship between those two companies is irrelevant. The advertiser failing to pay does not retroactively turn you into a pirate.

The whole argument is pointless in the first place, it's irrelevant whether or not you consider ad blocking to be technically piracy. A sensible adblock argument would be around the ethics of manipulation versus payment, or security versus whatever it is advertisers want. Arguing semantics doesn't matter.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

This is nonsense. Your argument is that you're a pirate if one corporation with no relation to the content fails to pay a corporation which distributes but does not own the content. If you watch an ad then the advertising company refuses to pay you do not suddenly become a pirate.

If a struggling McDonald's franchise fails to pay some franchisee fee that does not mean you pirated your big mac.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Dark matter might not even exist, all we know is that gravity-based predictions break down after a certain point. Dark matter is the just the most popular proposed solution where you essentially just add extra undetectable mass until it works. The distant second is Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) or some variation of it, which is where you try to tweak the theories to fit observations instead. It has the same problem as dark matter where we keep coming up with better experiments which always fail to find anything.

There's a similar problem at the opposite end of the scale spectrum too; quantum mechanics doesn't play nice with our current understanding of gravity leading to the search for the "theory of everything". This is why I personally lean towards the idea that it's our theories that are wrong and not an undetectable mass, but this isn't my field so my opinion isn't worth much (especially since a majority actually working in the field lean towards dark matter as far as I can tell).

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You're being downvotes because it's irrelevant and you're claiming a feature that also exists in Firefox is the reason your preferred browser is better. It makes no sense.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

There was an experiment once where it was determined that a frog with it's brain removed wouldn't jump out of slowly heated water but would reflexively jump if placed into already hot water, leading to a myth that a frog won't leave boiling water if heated gradually enough.

Idioms around frog boiling generally means to make changes slowly and gradually enough that there is minimal reaction from affected parties.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Username and display name can be set independently, you should have a "Display name" field in settings. Their non-unique display name is "max" and their unique username is "@[email protected]". If you check their profile you should see both.

If you don't set a display name it will be the same as your username, if you set display name to the same as username (like I have) it'll show your username without the instance even to people on other instances.

[–] [email protected] 58 points 2 months ago (10 children)

No, it's the website's fault. You only need explicit consent if you're tracking users beyond what your service obviously requires to function, the problem is these sites are stalking you.

And if it's even slightly harder to decline than to accept they're likely not in compliance anyway so it's definitely not the EU's fault.

view more: next ›