alterom

33 ms·

421.
by alterom 1y ago
>There's no genocide Thank you. This is all that needs to be said on this subject. The word genocide does not mean "a lot of red flags and generally terrible things", nor was it made to describe that. > Don't r
422.
by alterom 1y ago
>Not the most polite way to discuss a genocide, or at the very least an absolutely dire situation. It's as polite way as using the word genocide to describe the experience of white people in South Africa today merits. I can only r
423.
by alterom 1y ago
They can demand all they want, but they can't guarantee any way of getting the ticket to the person that send a payment... which makes it a bit of a tall demand.
424.
by alterom 1y ago
They don't even have to have the same price if the seller just effectively returns the ticket back to the system. Then it's up for grabs. There's no guarantee for the buyer that an out-of-band payment will get them the tick
425.
by alterom 1y ago
>> Aren't JSON parsers technically not following the standard if they don't reliably store a number that is not representable by a IEEE754 double precision float? >That sentence has four negations and I honestly can&#x2
426.
by alterom 1y ago
>Wise is a "payment processor" so it isn't regulated to the same standard. Which standard? In the US, the standard in question is "money transmitter", regulated on the state level. In California, both Revolut a
427.
by alterom 1y ago
>I doubt they have a license to operate in all countries where the service is accessible/used. Really? I doubt you have tried checking all countries' regulations. Or any, for that matter. Because there isn't a country
428.
by alterom 1y ago
>Are those fintech companies under any financial regulatory authority? In the US, they need to be licensed on a state level. E.g.: they'd need to have an MTL (Money Transmittance License) in California, regulated by DFPI: https:&
429.
by alterom 1y ago
> In the end I made a gif[0] and called them out publicly in the hope that they'd do something about it. Did they end up doing something about it because of that post?
430.
by alterom 1y ago
>It's easier to get justice from a local bank in your country, or to at least talk to a real person face to face than from PayPal Luxemburg or wherever they're located. Is it, really? It would not matter to the local court wh
431.
by alterom 1y ago
That sounds like a small claims court case, if not suing PayPal for outright theft. I'm not a lawyer, but theft under pretenses of "protecting your account" (from being accessed by you, that is) is still theft.
432.
by alterom 1y ago
Awesome! I've rigged my 3D printer to use as a 2D plotter, and had a ton of fun programming it to draw fractals like the Dragon Curve [1]. I also made a tool to do cursive handwriting/calligraphy with it, to make fancy postcards a
433.
by alterom 1y ago
I'm ashamed to say that, as much as I appreciate the wonderful game, I gave up :)
434.
by alterom 1y ago
PG & E's, unfortunately.
435.
by alterom 1y ago
Thank you for your service o7 May your screams into the void be heard by the stakeholders, and not just people.
436.
by alterom 1y ago
They're ahead of you. They're already using AI slop to come up with these rules in the first place, to verify compliance, and to respond to your complaints. It's AI slop all the way down. And the shittier things are, the mo
437.
by alterom 1y ago
>Using the most commonly version of the product, on the commonly used hardware, at least 2 days a week should be a prerequisite for every product owner. I am a firm believer that the software should also be developed on commonly used
438.
by alterom 1y ago
>Tell your product owners that they should actually use the product they’re owning I did. Not that anyone listened tho.
439.
by alterom 1y ago
Sure, and perhaps that's the reason why we don't have a built-in for_tree : for some people, order matters; for others, it doesn't. Then, for some cases, depth-first traversal is needed; for others, breadth-first. Then , th
440.
by alterom 2y ago
>I don't know what concerns me more, the fact that this isn't a complete conspiracy, or the fact that people (and this comment) seem somewhat indifferent about it. Judging by the comment history, it appears that their words h
441.
by alterom 2y ago
Shudders That was one figure I haven't yet remembered when making analogies to describe what's going on. But it's so apt. And Lysenko was successful .
442.
by alterom 2y ago
As an autistic person: please no. But I guess that's just a part of the war on science this administration is waging. Getting rid of the population overrepresented in sciences will get them there fast.
443.
by alterom 2y ago
>The lifetime ROI of college is only 13%? Yeah, that's BS. Right off the bat, I'm seeing different numbers[1] for median earnings elsewhere: $60K for college graduates vs. $36K for high-school diploma holders. I have no idea
444.
by alterom 2y ago
>I disagree. I highly appreciate @alterom's perspective and clear elucidation, and think the discussion has been fantastic. Thank you so much for this comment! The "specific goal or outcome" then has already been reached
445.
by alterom 2y ago
>If that is your goal, you couldn't be doing a worse job of it. Well this comment of yours doesn't help either. Genuinely curious if you've read the rest of what I wrote, and have any thoughts (objections? agreeing with
446.
by alterom 2y ago
>Out of curiosity, do you have a specific goal or outcome in mind in this exchange? I have tried to determine what your and your sparring partner's objectives are, and I admit it is difficult to discern. Thank you for asking! I&#x
447.
by alterom 2y ago
>I even agree with a lot of the stuff you're saying about teachers! But your tone in these comments leaves a lot to be desired. OK, so we agree on the substance. Excellent. As for the tone (and discussing it) - we're gettin
448.
by alterom 2y ago
Side note: the parent's entire argument boils down to this: "Look at how hurt the teacher would be by being fired, you are a bad person for suggesting that. Setting aside the Ad-Hominems ¹ like "Are you better than the te
449.
by alterom 2y ago
>Meta That's one way to say "I'll add nothing of substance to the current conversation, and comment on the perceived tone" I.e., we're back to reacting emotionally instead of talking about the subject of wh
450.
by alterom 2y ago
>You seem very angry yourself To whom? Not to me. Please don't try to assert you know what someone else is feeling. What they wrote wasn't angry. >and willing to let that anger guide you to harming someone. It's n

More ›