Right, I recall news from years ago where a bunch of celebrities’ very private photos backed up to iCloud were leaked. They may or may not have known they uploaded those to iCloud, I dunno. But imagine what’s up there if you don’t realize you’re doing a backup. Not just photos, but like scanned documents with vulnerable information. And all that personal info in a centralized server is a big ol honeypot for a malicious actor.

It’s not hard to see why this is a vulnerability, is what I’m getting at.

I would question the efficiency claim. Uber and the like claimed incredible market dominance, driving local food delivery and taxi services out of business. They’re only now really being forced to find profitability.

I wonder if AI is going to be similar. The powerful models right now, as I understand it, have ludicrous power requirements. I don’t know their balance sheets, but in the current race to market share, I’m skeptical that most of these services are in the green.

What that ultimately says about the future I don’t really know. Like it could be we reach some point where the models get better, or more specialized, or something and profit arrive. Or maybe theres a point of diminishing returns where the profit just can’t be made, and once the hype falls off (and investors stop clamoring for AI) these companies will ask what they’re getting for the money spent.

(And of course I could just be straight up wrong about profits today not being there.)

Flavored tobacco was literally marketed to children, to get them addicted to cigarettes from an early age. The “protect the children” arguments are often used to ban things that made no impact or even positive impact in children’s lives (DnD, sexual equality). Or it’s used to justify surveillance and overreach (porn bans and she verification laws)

These aren’t equivalent.

It comes from the case against Henry Ford after he saw his company was making gobs of cash and decided to give some of that to his employees. Shareholders successfully sued him to stop this on the grounds that he has a fiduciary duty to shareholders.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

As with anything legal, there is nuance, but the basic assertion that there is fiduciary duty to shareholders is not wrong.

Why would you say that? Do you think everyone is just really jazzed about death? I think you seem to have missed the point of the outcry.

You really can. Right to work, + free speech is only applicable wrt the government.

The fact that it’s legal does not make it moral.

Not the person you responded to, but: left economically is not left socially.

Ah! Well! I don’t like that!

As with DD1, DD2 is fun and I don’t mean to say it isn’t. The MTX just provides a barrier to entry for folks turned off by it, and I wish it wasn’t there.

Huh. Did it??

https://www.reddit.com/r/DragonsDogma/comments/1bktrh3/are_we_forgetting_that_dd1_had_microtransactions/

Here’s someone corroborating you, but it’s impossible to Google at the moment for obvious reasons. I have 0 recollection of any MTX, though. FWIW, it wouldn’t be any less bad if they did it before too.

To be clear though, it didn’t ruin it. I said it “marred” the game. It is a mark that affects how the game is perceived and I hate that. The game itself is fun, and I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

Hate it hate it. This game is so good, and it’s like I’m playing my old favorite again. The fact that they marred my baby with MTX like this is just gross. DD1 should be more popular, and what they did to DD2 may keep it from being the powerhouse it could because people will see the “mixed” ratings and second guess. Or they’ll open the store page and see a wall of MTX and get the wrong idea.

But that’s just part of it of course. If this works for them, it’ll explode. And it will work for them. And everyone will get these fucking MTX in their full priced AAA games. And then once sales on MTX aren’t up to snuff – or if they are up to snuff, but in a few quarters when sales are merely consistent rather than continuing to grow – they’ll start pushing it. Just like they did with Shadow of Mordor where the gameplay gave you a nasty grind and a quick “buy your way past it” option.

I’ll never buy the “it doesn’t effect you in a single player game” argument. It will, because the market incentives a worse experience for those less willing to buy in.

Want to make a point clear here – never put anything on your resume that you aren’t prepared to answer questions about. That means if you’re lying about freelance (whether the above commenter means to imply you should), then you should be ready to answer questions about your freelance lie.

Same goes for any projects. For CS, if you have a pet project you wrote 12 years ago, but it’s interesting enough to note on a resume, glance over it enough to know what it’s about. You might be surprised by your interviewer installing your app on their phone or something.

I can’t speak for the original commented, but I’m personally quite tired of the thin veneer that’s slapped into these statements. I would prefer a company just be honest and talk about the profit incentives. They want people using the free version to please pay for the expensive one.

For my experience, I still retain the general irritation at product quality going down regardless of how they word it. But now I’m also annoyed that MS isn’t being straightforward about it.

They were never giving it away. They included wordpad with your purchase of windows. They no longer do. I don’t think anyone is saying that windows is not “within their rights”, they’re saying that this degrades the product we already pay for. That is worth complaining about, even if our ultimate recourse primarily ends up being to find an OS that better serves our needs.

Honestly though I’m struggling to understand why you’d think that’s about Microsoft’s rights to begin with??

Certainly. There’s a big difference between me giving cash and uplifting someone who is actively harming people today, and supporting a dead man’s art.

Of course remember there’s nuance as well. It doesn’t cost me much to stop interacting with JKR’s output, but buying quality shoes that don’t in some way support sweatshop owners or fast fashion represents a significant time/money investment on my part.

And if there’s something important for my health than it goes right out. idk, maybe Dr. Scholl was there on Jan 6 and I was prescribed those Dr. Scholl’s foot goobers by a podiatrist, I’m not going to quibble too much.

Which ties in to the privilege of being socially conscious. It costs me nonzero money and energy that some might not have to do all of these things. I cannot blame or fault the person who works at Chick-fil-A paying rent, even if their work supports CFA.

Calling 2017 “vintage” is animal behavior. Rodents do that when they’re going through your garbage.

Despite Bethesda being kinda weird and shitty, I remain excited about the game myself. It still blows me away they decided to release without modding tools. But I’m looking forward to that quite a bit

Yooooo that’s actually awesome. If they hit Apple next that’d get even better.

The play store has some weird security items attached to it that blocks your bank or even some games if your phone is rooted. I’d love if Google was forced to drop stuff like that to retain users.

Yup, it’s why O(N+10) and even O(2N) are effectively the same as O(N) on your CS homework. Speaking too generally, once you’re dithering over the efficiency of an algorithm processing a 100-item dataset you’ve probably gone too far in weeds. And optimizations can often lead to messy code for not a lot of return.

That’s mostly angled at new grads (or maybe just at me when I first started). You’ve probably got bigger problems to solve than shaving a few ms from the total runtime of your process.

Yup, it’s why O(N+10) and even O(2N) are effectively the same as O(N) on your CS homework. Speaking too generally, once you’re dithering over the efficiency of an algorithm processing a 100-item dataset you’ve probably gone too far in weeds. And optimizations can often lead to messy code for not a lot of return.

That’s mostly angled at new grads (or maybe just at me when I first started). You’ve probably got bigger problems to solve than shaving a few ms from the total runtime of your process.

The problem breaks down into a few broad sub problems, as I see it.

1. Confirming the reviewer or voter is who they say they are (to prevent one entity from making multiple reviews).
2. Confirming the reviewer or voter is a valid stakeholder. This is domain-specific, but can be such metrics as “citizen of country”, or “verified purchaser”.
3. Confirming the intent of the reviewer. This meaning people who were paid off (buyers who are offered a gift card for a positive review, which happens plenty on Amazon), or discounting review bombs when a game “goes woke”.

1 and 2 have solutions. Steam cares about whether you’re a verified purchaser, and the barrier to entry of “1 purchase of a game per vote” is certainly enough to make things harder to bot. Amazon might be able to do the same, but so much of the transaction happens outside their purview that a foolproof system would be hard. Not that it’s in their interest to do so, though.

For places like Reddit or Lemmy, verifying one human per up vote is going to be impossible. New accounts are cheap and easy as a core function of the product. bot detection is only going to get harder, too.

If you used some centralized certificate system (like SSL certs), you could maybe get as granular as one vote per machine, but not without massive privacy invasions. The government does this for voting kinda, but we make a point to keep those private identifiers the government gives private.