the government should always identify itself to the people
the people should, by default, not be identified by the government
the power imbalance is important: the government is a large and powerful entity which is meant to serve the people without prejudice. people are individually small, and only gain their power from being a large group. the government is given power by the people in order for it to perform tasks beneficial to all, and must be accountable to the people
meanwhile if my US friends come to australia and try to tip i will angrily tell them where to shove it
tipping is a fucking scourge
i’d tape a screw driver to the battery… the tiny drivers you’d need for modern phones could be tiny: look at the sim ejectors… that, but as a screw driver
you can buy a house for cash every 3 years in the UK from that much money
yeah every 3 years is too much!
… well, tax so
every 5 years then!
… oh right rent he’d pay in the interim
fine every 7 years!
… ahhhh food costs money too!
okay okay every 8 years!
… i guess people do tend to pay bills
every 9 years!
… it’s not reasonable to be a shut in for those 6 years and being social costs money
every 10 years!
a helicopter crash in a populated area has a high likelihood of collateral damage
yeah for sure… i get it with apple one because i actively use music, drive, and tv+… certainly wouldn’t subscribe to it on its own, because you’re absolutely right: it’s too much of a hassle
there are many ways to fulfil this “obligation”… i’d argue that he’s increasing alphabet stock price in the short term but long term what the fuck is going to happen when the sources all go out of business?
… oh right they’re going to become a news monopoly… cool cool cool
regardless, i think there’s an argument to be made with all this “we are evil because it’s our legal duty to shareholders” that evil is a bad long-term choice. i think boeing is the prime example: if they weren’t “too big to fail” they’d be fucked because of their short term thinking
it’s a little annoying but i find searching for the article title generally produces the right result in the news app
after using it for a bit, i’d say in most cases i agree: bit of a nothing burger in a lot of cases (to the point where a few times i’ve thought it was bugged and reverted to the old UI style… it wasn’t), but it’s pretty great when it comes to apps where the UI is secondary (content etc)… the diffraction in the UI rather than a blur makes the whole UI able to be ignored much easier, and IMO it’s still about as legible in most real scenarios
i was thinking i’d hate it, and i can still see there are some readability issues to work out… but actually im finding i love it: it really kinda sinks into the background and lets the main content on the screen shine… the “bending” of the content in the panels rather than a blur is a much more effective middle-ground to making the foreground UI disappear until you need it
is this the way of the future? probably not… it’ll be way harder for anyone to implement than a blur, and that’s without the animations etc that make things way more complex…
but i do think it’s interesting to try new things with how you separate foreground and background in UI: we’ve been just chucking a quick blur and semi transparent colour block on buttons etc for a while, and i think this approach has a lot of up-sides
the sooner humanity realises some things you like as an individual others don’t like, the sooner we can all start enjoying life much much more. far too many people don’t have fun because they think it’ll make them look bad, and that’s so sad
do what you want to do, be who you want to be, be proud of being weird - because we are all fucking weird - and don’t worry about what other people think… just be you and enjoy it
which part? it’s still transmitting right? and they got useful and interesting data from it only a few years ago
let’s not forget the agency that launched the probe that passed the edge of the solar system and is still functional and doing valuable things…… in the 70s
windows n-1 was was good: an always relevant statement not because it’s true, but because less shit than whatever the garbage is now is such a low bar
way better than you’d expect, or a structurally catastrophic mess
and that’s a 50/50 or
nationalise, and then privatise?
sometimes you want some sort of control, or trade… like, (as much as like everyone else hates them this is the best example i can think of) tesla holds a bunch of patents and says people are free to use them, but if you do you can’t sue them for patent infringement: they still have some control
existing copyright law covers exactly this. if you were to do the same, it would also not be fair use or transformative