"Yes, power users complain—and still continue using the site" I wonder what would happen after you removed old.reddit.com and api access for reddit apps. For icing on the cake, use creative class names to f*ck with RES and ad blockers. My guess, if you do all of this, reddit's gonna crash on the ground pretty quickly.
1) The ethicality of something is not sourced from nature. If this would be the case, then raping would be completely okay as animals doing something like that too, right? It's more coming from empathy, like we don't let people beating or killing each others as you don't want that happened to you as well.
2) In reality this is more like a demand issue. I eat meat because I like it even if I see it as somewhat unethical. Your personal decision does not really count, but the society's overall understanding of the issue. It's like your vote vs election results, your vote counts, but you are not gonna change the world single-handedly.
Personally I think the real solution will be growing meat artificially, only muscles without the rest of the animal.
I double-checked this, you are right, I thought they completely moved to the adobe model, but they are just trying to represent themselves as they did, still you can stop paying and keep using the software you bought
That's not really enough. Any kind of credibility system can be hacked. You should ask two images, mandatory, and one of them should be 'my product', like a some kind of an actual clue, that the reviewer purchased it at least. If you add some basic checking, like a reverse image search on your own db and in the internet to vet out low effort tries, this would be the minimum to prevent hijacking the system.
I had somewhat similar idea for a site like this, but only for negative reviews. This kind of a site stops the incentive of forging fake review, like who wants to forge a bad one, but this still has to be protected from defamation attempts. That's why I was thinking of making the post somewhat complicated, but not impossible to make the system enough hard to protect it low efforts, which is at least 90% of the attempts, and the rest would be up for a moderation team. The credibility system could work only over protection
Calling apple to be a social justice warrior is the most ironic thing I heard for a while. We are speaking about the company who actively encourages developers to go to subscription model no matter what the app does, the company, which does everything in order to make businesses unable to fix their devices, so stop their give competition for their outrageous repair prices and methods, the one who do everything to monopolize cash transfer for their sweet 30% cut for literally everything, the one who is using exactly the some components for a new model of a laptop, while they already have internal documentation about said component to be often failing in a short time. So LOL
I use TFS for source control, but still also use Leif Points (like scheduled backup of the project every day to a local storage) in case of something messed up by the server. So don't underestimate the old guy :)
I can't really believe this version of the story. Maybe it started like this, like P scammed the entire company, but a certain point the management had to discover the fraud, and they decided to go with it hence this went to the point when the government had to interfere. If we really want to force idea that this simply went over the CEO's head, than he was extremely incompetent, like looking and the screen, and believing what he saw on the screen, and i see this level negligence the same as doing this intentionally.
-how to be an educated consumer
-how to buy/sell house/car, other basic contracts and understanding them (nda, work contract, t&c)
-sexual education without any moral bs, just facts
-how to recognizing symptoms of common diseases
-basic civics and legal training
-read a book, see a painting, tell me your opinion about it, instead learn what scolars think
While the business software and development side seems to go to the right direction, the consumer product side is basically series of incompetent and/or anti-customer decision/catastrophes. IMO You were right about Satya, all the positive things happening, because there is someone who can hold against him. (because if he would be the origin of the positive changes, than everything would be improving)
I would subscribe to a blog you write about the people (with names, photos) behind every single business fuckup, especially if it is a decision made because of greed.
Microsoft did not grow big, because millions of home users decided to buy DOS/Windows as they considered the best choice. Microsoft purchased DOS, which was bundled for every single IBM PC. This gave the foundation for the company to be able to improve their software family giving them a stable income even if every single DOS alternative was superior to their system. IBM was not able to prevent the creation of the PC compatibles which was a really strong advantage for MS as DOS became their default go to OS. Cheap computers created a really big market for the platform so developing to MS products became a good idea. However the businesses were the ones who choose to buy Microsoft products, and not because of the OS, but their office software products, which worked, of course, primarily in their OS.
Most of the home users just get it bundled with their hardware purchase, others for home use just pirated it (especially out of US). Their focus were the software they use, did not really care about the OS.
And that's how piracy helped MS, children playing with computer games arrived in the work market with familiarity with MS products, which kept the companies using and buying those products.