• 0 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • I think you have a fundamentally different view than I do on the characters. They are all fundamentally nice people. The difference is, they get fixated on small issues, and let it control their actions. Jerry dates a woman that only looks good in bright light? Only go on dates that have good lighting. It is something you would want to do too, but you would have the control to not let it run the relationship. Jerry doesn’t have that control, and focuses on the good lighting at the expense of everything else.

    The characters aren’t mean. They didn’t wish I’ll on anyone. Many of the episodes are them trying to find a way to get out of a situation without being honest because they think the truth would hurt too. Idiots, yes, not not jerks.

    For another example. There is an episode where a waiter accidentally puts a menu on a candle and it lights on fire. George points it out, puts the fire out, and casually mentions “I think the busboy put the menu too close to the candle.” The manager overhears this, and fires the busboy. George then finds the busboy to try and help him get another job, but leaves the front door open, and the busboy’s cat escapes. It is the perfect example of what the characters are. They don’t want to hurt people, and go to extreme lengths to do it, even though it always backfires.



  • Stock price is really just a present value of future expected earnings. Buying Coke for $100 is because you think the earnings of that share in the future is worth $100. So yes, if the company makes an announcement that it isn’t as profitable, the price will go down, because buyers won’t want to pay the same for an asset that is returns less than it was expedited to.

    Yes, there are complications. Shorts, futures, non dividend yielding shares, and more make it more muddied. At the end of it though, the future expected earnings are what is being bought and sold.


  • The current model has it’s problems, but I really think this is the start of a new major product line for Apple. This isn’t going to be relegated to only the rich forever. There are a few problems to over come. It needs to be lighter, it needs to be cheaper, and it needs better battery life. All of those should be somewhat resolved in the next 10 years. When it does, I think the market will explode.

    The big selling point? TV. I know over the last few years I have kind of fought with my mom because she is hurting her viewing experience for the sake of aesthetics. The TV is mounted, but has a cabinet in front of it. It is loaded with tons of seasonal decorations. The reason? She can’t stand the site of a cord. So instead, she has figures tall enough to cover part of the screen blocking the view of the TV, all so the cords can be hidden behind the figures. So yes, she loses part of the viewing area, and the remote doesn’t work unless you get up and go to the side of the TV so the IR sensor isn’t blocked, but it LOOKS better!!

    The thing is, she isn’t alone. I bought a TV last year. During the time researching it, I would see similar opinions to my mom’s. Peopel would post pictures of their TV setup, asking if the size was OK, or if it should be higher, and the responses would be similar, telling the person to run cables through the wall, or get smaller stands or other complaints. It made me realize that many people care about those kind of things, and it will drive their purchase decisions.

    All the Apple Vision Pro has to do is show them that you can have a TV, with no bezel, make it any size and position you want, you get rid of glare from the sun, and it has no visible cables. That alone is enough for people to want to buy it. It isn’t there today, but it will get there in the somewhat near future.


  • I hadn’t read this before, and I am honestly shocked that this is the what the uproar is over. This isn’t a call to action to hurt anyone. It is basically a statement that there is a difference between a transwoman and a woman, that distinction needs to be made, and this is mainly due to society rushing to a solution without due diligence. This is not 1/100th of what it has been made out to be. If this is all it takes for someone to never want to associate with someone else, then I don’t think he should associate with anyone. Everyone is going to differ from your opinion on one topic or another, you can’t escape it.





  • I feel like your comment is the most reasonable explanation. The charity sounds like it isn’t actively being run. It is probably a misunderstanding. I can see the charity paying for a group to run the charity, but because their income is very small, they want the charity ran frugally, and are paying the minimum required for management. The management is running the account, making sure taxes are filed, etc, but Jirard thought they were dispersing the funds too. They don’t talk much, other than a quick review at tax season, and the issue is never addressed, because both sides don’t interact enough to see the difference.

    This video really frustrated me, because Jobst is claiming things “Fraud” when the evidence he provided looks nothing like that. It isn’t great PR, but nothing so far looks remotely illegal, or even unethical. The internet just loves ragging on a “bad guy,” and are eager to get mad at the bad guy of the day.





  • olmec@lemm.eetoGames@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the distinction is that starting with the Switch, handheld gaming has been a different experience. Sure, you could play Super Mario World on you Game Boy Advance on the go, but that was a decade after the game had been released. Now, you get the modern Mario game on your handheld, and it is the exact same game and the exact same time as the console release. It is a large shift in gaming.

    Now, I would argue that this is a step back, as the experience that works best on a a handheld isn’t the best for a home console/PC. That isn’t the point of this article though. The point is that short of some performance loss, the on the go experience is nearly identical to the at home experience.


  • Correct me if I am wrong with current teaching methods, but I feel like the way you outlined things is how school is taught. Calculators were “banned” until about 6th grade, because we were learning the rules of math. Sure, we could give calculators to 3rd graders, but they will learn that 2 + 2 = 4 because the calculator said so, and not because they worked it out. Calculators were allowed once you get into geometry and algebra, where the actual calculation is merely a mechanism for the logical thinking you are learning. Finding the answer to 5/7 is so trivially important to finding that that value for X is what makes Y = 0.

    I am not close to the education sector, but I imagine LLM are going to be used similarly, we just don’t have the best way laid out yet. I can totally see a scenario, where in 2030, students have to write and edit their own papers until they reach grade 6 or so. Then, rather than writing a paper which tests all your language arts skills, you will proof-read 3 different papers written by LMM, with a hyper focus on one skill set. One week, it may be active vs passive voice, or using gerunds correctly. Just like with math and the calculator, you will move beyond learning the mechanics of reading and writing, and focus on composing thoughts in a clear manner. This doesn’t seem like a reach, we just don’t have curriculum ready to take advantage of it yet.




  • If you consider the last one as New Super Mario Bros U, then sure, we are over a decade. However, Mario Maker, and especially Mario Maker 2, are so wonderful and repayable, that I feel no need for a new 2D Mario game. I get that a game like Wonder is going to have “curated” levels, and things can work more cleanly, but the volume of quality levels in the Mario Maker series is enormous. Anyway, I just find it odd to see your comment, which seems to ignore these titles.


  • olmec@lemm.eetoTechnology@lemmy.worldSpotify re-invented the radio
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It takes ads to bandwidth and server costs for Spotify. The ads on Spotify are worth less than before, because the ads have less reach. That means Spotify will have to play more ads to cover cost, and because the revenue per ad will go down. Maybe your little action has an insignificant effect, but if millions did what you did, it would have a drastic result.

    Never mind that doing this will give your favorite artist a few more pennies at the cost of a different artist that didn’t get his numbers inflated. You aren’t doing some great good to save the planet.