The good timeline was the one where Debbie Wasserman Schultz didn’t comit whatever is worse than election fraud and conspire against Bernie Sanders

Number of As also don’t say anything about how skilled the developers/designers/writers are, or to what extent they’ve been allowed to cook without chains or directions.

A lot of AAA games would have been amazing, if it wasn’t for this meddling. The sad part of it, is that they’ve probably made the shareholders more money because of it. They’ve of course traded in brand value and goodwill for short term profit.

Consumers still preorder en mass. Buy the always-online single player games with DRM, and micro transaction stores. Then in the same breath, complain about the situation.

It’ll be their own downfall. Telephony is handled perfectly fine through tcp/ip. So if carries don’t support it, we’ll start seeing components that turn the phone part of phones to Internet connectivity modules.

Dude. You’re reading a lot more into what you’re replying to, than what is there to be read. I bet “Reddit seems to be leaking” follows you around, huh?

Considering that FFI is very much a thing, I’m finding it difficulty to understand the point it’s trying to make.

Have you considered booting up a live USB to try it out?

This should be regulared. At the very least, require any user to be an organ donor

I assume they would have a budget if not only a limit on available working hours.

Checks fascist handbook. Jup. Checks out.

Only losing a week on a major change is a good sign. I wish the people who started the project had that same attitude with regards to clarifying requirements. They also did the opposite of designing a flexible solution. No thought to the actual problem, picking a contrived problem to “tackle”. Full on blinders on event driven architecture, split a simple thing into multiple nano-services, yet tightly coupled by sharing the same model which is de/serialized at every step, and then throw in application level filtering on the events… no schemas, no semantic versioning.

This is the installed camera app as seen in the play store for me.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.GoogleCamera

It shows up with the name “Pixel Camera”

waiting for solid requirements

This is exactly the situation. Except that my team consisting of consultants just “started”, instead of trying to scope out the constraints and larger picture. I joined a month or so after.

Six months, and the result so far of their exploration is a fairly uninteresting happy-path use of some technologies, barely related to the task that had unclear requirements. Turns out the work done is unsuited for it. Boggles the mind how much resources are wasted on such things.

Feels extremely unrewarding to have worked, relatively hard, for half a year, and the fruits of my labour is… getting to the point where the actual problems are solved. Which one could have done from day one, if one had started in a team without wrong preconceptions, or, no team, for that matter.

Maybe I’m not aware what I’m missing out on. On GrapheneOS on a Pixel phone, you can install the camera app made by Google. com.google.android.GoogleCamera. Has some fancy features, but maybe not the ones you are referring to?

It was the job switch that landed me in that situation. A change from a small company where about 70% was actual productivity, to a large corporation, in a team where there was severe issues with planning and working on the correct problems. So far it’s been 6 months of… well, wondering if I’m missing something, or a bigger picture somewhere, to trying to turn the ship in the right direction. If it’s still like this in another 6 months, I’ll consider a change of scenery.

I’m down to 0% the last 6 months. It’s miserable.

People living off their wealth don’t pay high taxes

That’s… why you might want to tax wealth? Sales tax does literally nothing to address the problem of neither wealth nor income inequality. Income tax does address some of it. Removing it just because it doesn’t address all of it is absurd. Thinking it is covered by sales tax, is even more so. Those who would be in the lower tax brackets would have less buying power, and those with high incomes would be having a party, well… until the fairly immediate collapse of the economy and the riots start, that is. Just because one aspect doesn’t cover everything doesn’t mean you remove it all-together and replace it with… well, I’m still curious.

The ways to circumvent paying taxes, is what you go after, but you don’t do that by just removing existing obstacles. You do it by adding more obstacles. You can still tax income, and you adjust it to tax the high income earners much more. You evaluate wealth and tax that. You put a tax on absurd inheritances. You limit the profitability of trading necessities (e.g. housing) as goods by also high taxation.

The only thing I objected to in your original comment was to suggest 0% tax on income… and that this is compensated for by increasing sales tax… as if it solves anything at all. Income tax accounts for about 50% of the US federal budget. Tricks to avoid paying income tax are well known, but the idea of not addressing the issue, but instead just “start from scratch”, or suggest to remove something fundamental to the function of a modern state, is … tiresomely American. It’s like the Churchill quote of Americans always doing the right thing, after having tried everything else.

I understood your argument. It’s just not how it works. Even if amassed wealth was used to buy stuff as a exchange of goods, it wouldn’t be anything significant, and it would be less significant the more wealth we’re talking about. That in itself should clue you in on why this doesn’t work.

If taxes is a problem in terms of inequality, why… not tax it more progressively then? That’s the whole point of it. Reduce taxes for lower brackets, increase for higher brackets. Even if you thought 0% tax makes sense, which sort of already exists for the lowest bracket, and you want this to apply to more people… then, just do that, starting at from lower income side. Do the same starting from the upper income side, but there you increase it significantly. How far you go, is politics.

Put into place stricter regulations for the exploitation of workers. Actually enforce this stuff, not just give fines that are less than the gains. Replace your election system, it’s broken. Etc. There are soooo many things, that actually make sense, and would have a good effect. But looking at say 400k+ incomes and thinking “tax it at 0%”. Reagan’s grave would look like the classic zombie stereotype, except it would be his dick protruding from the ground.

Sales tax on everything… isn’t a tax on wealth. Why not just do some of the things Scandinavian countries do?

Why is it so all-or-nothing on any one idea? There is a lot of nuance in how you tax income, and the teeth and regulation in order to effectively tax corporations. E.g. Anything over 400k, taxed at 90%… is something. Suggesting to tax it instead at 0% because you can slap on some flat sales tax… is just silly.

Doesn’t help that politics are very corrupt, politicians can do insider trading, media is owned by private interests, unions are demonised and unsurprisingly workers rights are almost non-existent, and you have a two party system that’s deeply flawed.

The US had a real shot at moving in the right direction, but the DNC saw it fit to sabotage its own candidate. I’d imagine treason charges for something like that… but, not even an apology.

Anyways…

Still doesn’t mean “massed” is correct, and it’s weird to use here. Never understood why one would go out of one’s way to present an incorrect argument.

Edit: feel free to downvote me. It doesn’t make me any less right, or the parent comment any less incorrect. Weird, but hey, there are worse things to be wrong about.

Processes can make their own processes. If you know of such a secondary process, you might still want to terminate the one at the top.

Something like that?