snooggums

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

Micropayments would scale at a ridiculous rate like microtransactions in games have, so your $20 example would be at least $200 in reality by now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Ahhhh, I was.wondering why they would take the time to set up an API with that data and forgot that almost everything has a way to just dump things into it without needing to be set. I forget because where I work we actively avoid that approach because of risks like this.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yeah, it seemed cliche to me. Maybe it surprised some people because it wasn't a thing in Disney movies?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It’s funny people talking about how things are done in the U.S. and giving different answers.

Yeah, different states have different requirements and processes.

In Kansas, when I got my original license in the 90s it cost like $60 total to get the first one and ever since it has been somewhere between 10-30 or so to renew every 6ish years or something. Originally you had to take a written test that you could fill in at home. Just ridiculously cheap and no real barriers. We also don't have any kind of emissions requirements for non-commercial vehicles. The lax requirements for driving and emissions is probably the result of the farming lobby.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (3 children)

They aren’t going to make this easy cause it quite literally means giving the shareholders less profit, which is illegal in the US.

Making less profit than previous periods of time or even operating at a loss is not illegal in the US. Many companies have periods where they lose money or sacrifice short term profits for long term growth.

Investors with enough control might boot the leadership out, but they can also do that for whatever reason including unrealistic expectations.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

That is what the help files say, but when I tried to register a work account yesterday it did the verify you are human, then said there was something suspicious and sent the email verification, then said there was something suspicious and is now requiring a phone verification even though I did not enter a phone number.

At no point was I ever signed in and able to even pick a channel. This all happened while trying to log in for the first time through the browser at work with my work email. I guess that someone else might not hit that phone requirement as I only tried to do the registration once, but it is in no way limited to joining a particular channel.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I don't know if it is new, but it is in the help files when I tried to figure out why it required both confirming an email and the phone.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Do you think I'm talking about inherent value to dogs and cats?

I'm going to assume you are trolling and kick myself for falling for it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

I don't think you understand what inherent means.

If something does not always have value in every circumstance, the value is not inherent.

[–] [email protected] 123 points 9 months ago (7 children)

The worst part is that they act like you can set up an account without a number, but then it acts like there is 'suspicious activity' and requires you to verify with the phone immediately.

Just rant into this yesterday trying to set up a work account as my work phone is not a mobile phone with sms.

Was registering really suspicious?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (4 children)

My only complaint about discord is that it requires a mobile phone number for an account, and you can't use the same number for multiple accounts.

I want separate personal (with a silly account name) and professional (with my name) accounts, but only have one phone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Pants have value in any climate.

Pants can have value, they do not have inherent value.

You’re looking for particular circumstances that mitigate or otherwise affect the inherent value of certain goods, though your scenarios depend on those goods having inherent value in the first place.

I am pointing out that there are exceptions to the assumption that there is inherent value to show that material goods do not have inherent value. That is the opposite of 'depending on them having inherent value'.

view more: next ›