You can actually use that as a negotiating point. Let's say a new route is opened causing traffic to bypass a normally high traffic point. The advertiser might still price per potential impression per dollar when the reality is significantly different.
Not to nitpick but it's important for people to do their homework on this and realize that those selling the ad space are going to price on the higher end of potential impressions.
Serious question: is it the same law that requires websites to give a cookie pop up?
Because I let users know I'm not going to spam them with that shit at those that enacted that law can go to hell for every site I visit having it. It's a good thing but really annoying. There has to be a better, more interesting way.
It's been like that for a while if you have your wifi/Bluetooth on when airplane mode is on, it will do it the same way next time you turn on airplane mode. I used that frequently on my 5S, spare 6, and iPhone X.
When I had an office as a graduate student and then consultant, adjunct faculty, and other positions, I was almost never in my office.
I simply could not focus on work there the same way as elsewhere. I'm a highly social extrovert and in order to get things done that don't involve directly interacting with people, I "introvert myself". If someone comes to chat with me they snap me out of that mode and it's almost impossible for me to get back in.
I find libraries, coffee shops, empty offices to be the best places for me.
But remote != digital nomadism despite the 2 being able to go together.
Tipping before the service is weird. However, I don't know if you've ever worked on the other side of the counter, but it's a lot easier to get someone to tip when they already have their wallet out and cash in hand. Getting someone to take their wallet out a second time, regardless of how "above and beyond" the service or product are is tough.
I'm glad I never worked at a restaurant where pay is supplemented by tips. That's an unacceptable practice.
At Starbucks, tips were in excess to wages, so anything people gave were a really nice bonus.
Tipping should be done out of generosity. Do you value that person, their time, the level of quality they bring you?
If you look at Japan, tipping is not a thing. In some places it might even be considered an insult to tip because that level of quality is a deeply engrained part of the culture, not something to be rewarded extra for.
However, I see it as a way to show my appreciation, my gratitude.
Yes, I believe that people who have the means to tip who don't, yet greedily eat up high quality service and goods, are being stingy in the worst sense. Just from my experience at Starbucks, it seemed like those who tipped most frequently were the people who might not really been able to afford it.
An extra dollar from 100 customers, for whom that is less than 1% of 1% of their net worth means $20 for a 5 person shift. That extra $20 usually is gas money, college supplies, or a couple bucks to spend for something fun.
However, we completely and utterly lack empathy. So many people DON'T know what it's like to be on the other side of the counter and they completely forget that those people are thinking and feeling humans like they are. That those people have dreams and ambitions just like they do. That they are working because they have SOME goal. There is more depth to the person than the apron they wear, the smile they put on, the job they do. We forget that. We view them as objects and we devalue their existence.
But those who do tip, those who don't necessarily have the means to but still do, they have not forgotten. Perhaps it's because their situation isn't too far removed.
I think Steinbeck said it well:
"If you're in trouble, or hurt or need - go to the poor people. They're the only ones that'll help - the only ones."
Just because it depolymerizes doesn't mean it does so into happy stuff. Photodegradation is the process of degrading with the application of photons (typically in the visible to UV range). Many things, especially plastic things, degrade in the sunlight, some faster than others. But then, when it degrades, when those monomers (single repeat used to make a polymer) split up, what did you just release into the environment?
If you want to understand this process more, here's a good and accessible read: [Photodegradation and photostabilization of polymers, especially polystyrene: review](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320144/)
There's this famous picture of Zuckerberg with tape over parts of a MacBook Pro next to him implying that whoever that computer belonged to didn't feel that even Apple's security was enough to protect their privacy. (I can't remember if that's suppose to be his laptop or just one he's coincidentally next to)
It strikes me that either you legitimately can't relate but might think you can, or you aren't empathizing with the author (nothing wrong with that, sometimes we legitimately can't put ourself in their "shoes"), or you may possibly be unintentionally gatekeeping nonconformity. None of that is meant as an offense to you but just the 3 impressions I get from your comment after reading the article.
James provides many meaningful thoughts, and even gave a disclaimer that this is something he's still thinking through more.
One of those meaningful thoughts I felt was particularly provocative was this:
> I also learned that being a successful non-conformist is easier when you have security.
It's easy for the rich kid from a well-connected family to be a nonconformist and still succeed at what they hope to do in life. Take a poor kid, who is also well-connected but not necessarily to those comparable to the rich kid. Poor kid might have a lot of social capital among their community such that they can get things done, but compare that to rich kid who can always fall back on a family friend hiring them for a junior management position where they'll get paid orders of magnitude more than the poor kid... Now imagine that poor kid with low to no security being a nonconformist.
For them, that could go one of two ways:
1. Ostracized from community for going against the grain/not getting in line
2. They get lucky and some aspect of nonconformity brings them great success and even wealth
Which of those two do you think happens more frequently?
So, I politely disagree. While it does seem that he's sharing some raw thoughts, there are some good clear items in there to think about.
I hope you realize that doesn't mean that you disconnected.
Try opening an ad-monetized app that requires network connection to load the ads. Make sure cellular date for that app is off. You'll get ads. Unless something has changed in the past few weeks, you should see ads load despite the fact that they should not in this scenario.
This means the Wi-Fi isn't off, isn't even in a respectful hibernate state, it's on but telling you it's off. It's your child telling you "yes mommy/daddy I'll do it right" and then cuts corners knowing you're going to trust them.
In the past few weeks my iPhone X has been having a strange Wi-Fi bug where it says it's on in the top corner of the screen, but in settings it says it's off. I didn't turn it off. When I go to turn it off, it's frozen and I have to restart settings. I'm highly suspicious it's related to Apple's Wi-Fi and Bluetooth default hibernate code or implementation of that code.
Apple screwed the pooch on this one. They should allow us to toggle the hibernate mode or long press to choose whether to go into hibernate or actually turn off, not force us to use it in a misleading way.
I've trained myself to always turn it off in settings, it's annoying, but it fits apple's product motto:
Just like Microsoft Excel. Unfortunately, Microsoft backpedalled between 2011 and 2016 versions (those are for Mac) and removed a significant amount of functionality.
Files closed with the application no longer reopen, UI elements are gone, and, worse yet, you can't completely customize all of the possible keyboard shortcuts any more, you can't even find access to them.
To my understanding, this was for 2 reasons (excuses):
1. Some OS changes Apple made*
2. To push people to subscribe to office 365 and "gain" that functionality
* I paid full price for both 2011 and 2016 (and the corresponding windows office copies). 2011 still works on the most recent macOS with all of the functionality. So, claiming that Apple did something to make the feature of automatically reopening the documents you had open when you quit broken is bull. Their old version still does that on the new OS just fine (despite that little pop up claiming the software is incompatible...it still works, why not use it?)
After buying MS Office with removed functionality, I will sadly not be buying office again. Nor will I be subscribing to office 365, nor will I be supporting it in any corporate ecosystem. The files from the old versions are perfectly fine and when they no longer are, Libre office and (almost embarrassingly) Google docs will have to do.
I'm definitely not the only one bailing. My father has been off for many years and, as a principal engineer at a Silicon Valley medical device company he helps others see that we don't need to let Microsoft maintain a stranglehold on us.
But, I was happy buying the new versions of office year after year until these most recent changes. Excel 2005 was one of their best versions. That was my subscription model: I pay full price every couple years you put out a new version and, in return, you give me a good, solid product that built off the prior one (or at least stayed damn near as useful) while providing support to that product through updates and bug fixes.
Subscription services are already gaining groans from people and we don't need another subscription in our lives.
But, to wrap up, back to the point: even though excel (and the other MS Office software) were incredibly versatile already, you still had the option to install the Analysis ToolPak if you needed to work with complex statistics or engineering analysis or even write your own plugins or macros for it, instead of those features overburdening the software and overwhelming the users by "covering all the use cases".
Apple's podcast app used to be great. I used to be able to easily subscribe and download all the episodes for a show, navigate to any show, and get back to what I was listening to all in a few taps.
As it stands now, if you want to add all of the episodes from a show that you have listened to for the past 14 years that somehow was not subscribed to on your device, you have to go to the show and subscribe, go to available episodes and tap on the + next to every.single.episode and even then sometimes episodes get lost.
You can set the custom settings to download all available, but it won't download the episodes of a subscribed podcast if you haven't explicitly added them (tap that + sign)
Also, can we just set the screen podcast app opens on to our own choice? I literally have to go through an extra menu just to see my show listing. Yes, I've created a "station" for the shows but that's immensely inconvenient if I want to listen to one show continuously without having to navigate to the shows page (guess I have to create a station for every show...)
I don't think the Apple funded shows will be bad. This article really seems to be creating a mountain out of nothing. Hopefully, this means that some lucky podcaster or media group makes $$$ off of a deal with Apple.
> If you fly within the United States or enter secure federal buildings and military bases, you will need a valid passport or other federally approved document, such as a REAL ID driver license or identification card, beginning October 1, 2020.
So, we need a passport to go between states, or a REAL ID...
I'm an advocate for security screening. I'm even fine with a bag swab or pat down. I've been flying all 30 years of my life to many parts of the globe.
What's going on in this article, if true, is not ok, it is not productive, and it is spreading a culture of fear and surveillance TO OUR OWN CITIZENS.
We are not China, Russia, or any other country that would create such a situation, but we are letting it happen.
I don't think people are against the accepted forms of surveillance you are mentioning, I think we're against the excessive stuff that's been going on.
At HPBB last year (coincidentally in Japan where high pressure food sterilization was first commercialized) there was a whole series on high pressure sterilization of food.
The last presentation was a company with a scalable automated canning and sterilizing machine that was simply beautiful from an engineering standpoint.
Since we don't fully understand nutrients and how stuff like high pressure sterilization, heating, and other methods affect bioavailability, impact protein structure, and create other changes, it's all down to trying and learning as we go.
What's great about pressure is that it can deactivate and destroy some of the harmful organisms in food, but my curious concern is what does that do to the cellular material we want intact for our body, how does that affect the protein structure (for those not familiar, protein structure and folding is absolutely crucial for functionality).
Irradiation concerns me more than pressure because if you're not careful, you could be breaking bonds that you don't want to be breaking.
All in all it's a fascinating topic and important to everyone who eats.
So, you're suggesting that we should let those who perpetuate cultures like falsifying records to continue to exist in industry without punishment when they are directly responsible for the harm that happens?
That sounds patently ridiculous.
The culture comes from the top. It's super easy for them to allow people lower down to take the fall for something they pressured subordinates to do.
Shoot, just look at Wells Fargo last year.
The higher ups said that those lower needed to boost account signups, so, suddenly people found themselves signed up with accounts they had never signed up for.
But we blame those lower for following an order, even if it's an implied order, because they were the ones who did the deed. It was so hard to link Al Capone to murder they had to get him for tax evasion.
He called the shots, but others took the shots.
So, when you say that it's ridiculous to target those execs who are setting the standards which are causing these problems, these deaths, you got some screw loose up there friend, because those execs are getting paid hundreds of thousands to hundreds of millions of dollars, while those doing what they are told so that they can keep their job are just trying to eat and pay rent.
You can actually use that as a negotiating point. Let's say a new route is opened causing traffic to bypass a normally high traffic point. The advertiser might still price per potential impression per dollar when the reality is significantly different.
Not to nitpick but it's important for people to do their homework on this and realize that those selling the ad space are going to price on the higher end of potential impressions.