you’re just paying more for no reason

You are basically paying the credit card fees for not using a card. It is a protection racket. “It’d be a shame if you didn’t use our credit card and had to pay extra due to card processing fees”.

We should do what the EU did. Clamp card fees to a small value so that they can’t meaningfully offer customers rewards which creates this twisted incentive.

Or stores just make the customer pay (most of) the card fees. As you said lots of smaller stores do this and I’m more than happy to pay with debit.

They are legal if you follow the regulations. The problem with the “rideshare” companies is that they don’t. We should just call them “unregulated taxis” rather than pretending that they are a different service. I think just about every taxi company these days is on some app or another (often the same that call unregulated cabs in countries that actually got their shit together and banned the unregulated ones).

Nah it’s worse. Bitcoin actually has legitimate uses. (Yes, they are a minority of actual usage, but they exist.) NFTs are only useful for speculation, gambling and money laundering.

“Rideshare” is also the least accurate term used to dodge regulations. It is just a taxi/cab. You are paying someone to get you from one place to another. They aren’t sharing their ride, they were never going where you are going before you told them to.

Yeah, downtown there are tons of gas-station brands that are just convenience stores. Surely many gas stations will offer electric charging but since most people will be charging at home the total number of gas stations will surely drop. Some will turn into convenience stores and some will just shut down.

You forgot step 2. Throw sacrificial drive into trash.

This is also likely interesting because console SDKs are usually highly restricted. So not only is the Minecraft code leaked (which is probably moderately interesting) it is likely that the console APIs are quite interesting to emulator developers and reverse engineering for other PS3 games.

Please be polite. If you don’t like a post you can downvote it. If you would like to comment please be more civil.

Nah, 90% chance that they do something stupider.

Yeah, I get it. It is definitely dry and it is shampoo 😆

You are thinking of something else. Bar shampoo is intended to be used with water much like bar soap. Dry shampoo is just sprayed or rubbed into hair without any water.

While Amazon is awful it isn’t just them. It is a systematic issue with our economic system. Our society constantly makes efforts to keep the poor poor so that they are forced to work for low pay resulting in a cycle of abuse. Basically every public company will end up in the same situation and we see that with every large company. If a large public company isn’t shit the CEO will be fired by the shareholders and replaced with one who makes the company shit.

So yes, avoid Amazon, but also talk to your government representatives. The cycle will always continue until the incentives are changed. To properly exit this shit system we need to change our society and government.

How is this faulty? The degree of damage is incredibly relevant. We don’t make everything that could ever cause damage illegal, because we have nothing left. Laws are a balancing act of pros and cons to society.

A car has far less visibility (they are inside a box with a few windows) will will do far more damage if they hit someone. A cyclist has dramatically better visibility (they have basically an unobstructed 180° view) and especially when going slow is very unlikely to cause significant damage (posing risk of significant harm only the the most frail and elderly).

If not requiring complete stops for cyclists leads to 1% more cyclists on the road (because their travel is easier) it almost certainly causes less harm overall due to how dangerous cars are and also their indirect health effects (both inactivity when driving and the pollution).

So no, the logic isn’t faulty at all and probably one of the most important arguments.

I guess it depends how you look at it. From my point of view the speaker isn’t actually talking about themselves. That is the “royal” part. And I mean she does say “as if” to back up that yes, she is not actually including herself.

I use https://difftastic.wilfred.me.uk/ which is well, fantastic. I have it set up as the default diff for Git and it is really nice.

No, this is the right meaning royal we. If you say “we are going into battle” it is talking about the person being talked to not the person talking. So in this case “We don’t eat that” would be implying that the cat doesn’t eat that, not actually saying anything about the speaker even though “we” would imply they are included.

Misuse of /s.

It’s also super locked down. You are only allowed to use it if Google or Apple says that your device is authorized. So no root, no custom ROMs. Unless your phone is owned by a corporation and that corporation is blessed by Apple or Google you are out of luck. (There are currently ways around this but the gaps are slowly being closed as older devices are phased out.)

I’m also not familiar. But my understanding is that the package maintainers should prevent this situation. Because otherwise even if there are package version dependencies (I don’t actually know if pacman does this) it would just block the update which results in a partial update which isn’t supported. For example if your theoretical unmaintained Firefox blocks the update of libssl but Python requires new functionality you would be stuck in dependency hell. Leaving this problem to the users just makes this problem worse. So the package maintainers need to sort something out.

It is a huge pain when it happens but tends to be pretty rare in practice. Typically they can just wait for software to update or ship a small patch to fix it. But in the worst case you need to maintain two versions of the common dependency. In lots of distros very common dependencies tend to get different packages for different major version for this reason. For example libfoo1 and libfoo2. Then there can be a period where both are supported while packages slowly move from one to the other.

IF no dependency tries to update too. Off course in that case I would stop. Without pacman -Sy, I never do that anyway, only -Syu.

That’s all you need to know. As long as you always use pacman -Syu you will be fine. pacman -Sy is the real problem. The wiki page is pretty clear about the sequences of commands that are problematic https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported.

Right? What i don’t understand is, when I uninstall with pacman -Rs firefox, delete the cached firefox package (only that file), then the system is in the same state as before I installed it. Then -S firefox should be okay, right? And it even looks up the new version.

This isn’t correct. It won’t look up the new version. Assuming that the system was in a consistent state it will download the exact same package that you deleted. The system only ever “updates” when you run pacman -Sy. Until you use -y all packages are effectively pinned at a specific version. If the version that gets installed is different than the one you removed it probably means that you were breaking the partial update rule previously.