imtyler

6 ms·

1.
by imtyler 4y ago
Electromagnetic locks are better suited for gateways that are open by default. I can't imagine why someone would create a vault dependent on electricity. That being said, I'm sure there are plenty of crimes that would go easier wi
2.
by imtyler 4y ago
>"The only way to attempt to improve the situation is show respect and hope it's eventually reciprocated." With who? I don't have a neighbor, I have an endless string of rotating strangers. I understand that bad neigh
3.
by imtyler 4y ago
My nextdoor neighbor sold their house last year and now it's an Airbnb. Despite the fact that I live in a house in a normal residential neighborhood, I'm now forced to live next to a hotel. And I have no say in the matter. Super f
4.
by imtyler 4y ago
I understand what's you're saying, that any digital scarcity is by design and therefore artificial. But damn I wish my Steam library had a resale value.
5.
by imtyler 4y ago
>"They're yours..." Yes and no. There's an important distinction between _having_ something and _owning_ something. You can have possession of figures carved from contraband elephant ivory. But if anyone who was incli
6.
by imtyler 4y ago
In this scenario I think the biggest issue with losing an account is the ability to aquire future purchases. But like I said, it's more a matter of principle for some. You own a book, you don't own a digital copy of a book.
7.
by imtyler 4y ago
I assume this violates the EULA of most retailers and subjects your account to possible deletion. Not saying that it's likely, but DRM restrictions seem like a matter of principle to some people. Even if you can strip the DRM you still
8.
by imtyler 4y ago
The quote is right there: "Radio (and TV) are uniquely obnoxious" Ads are obnoxious. That's not unique to radio.
9.
by imtyler 4y ago
What? Are you implying I don't deserve my job or I shouldn't exist?
10.
by imtyler 4y ago
It's funny but my original post started with: "I know a lot of people are going to see this and react with an 'oh well'." I'm an actual person, you know. I'm alive. I exit. My existence is not less importa
11.
by imtyler 4y ago
But that's not a product of the medium, to be fair.
12.
by imtyler 4y ago
Aw. I want to like this, but I work in radio. If you remove ads then there's no reason for the broadcaster to keep going. I'm not trying to be controversial, but if you remove profit how can the business continue to exist? And if
13.
by imtyler 4y ago
And we're discussing it because it affects us (the public,) what's your point?
14.
by imtyler 4y ago
How is not paying for content a huge expense?
15.
by imtyler 4y ago
My opening phrase ("As far as I know") was intended to imply that I am not an industry insider. These are indeed assumptions. Are they unreasonable assumptions in your eyes? May I ask why? They seem reasonable to me.
16.
by imtyler 4y ago
Yes, 'no overhead' was incorrect. I meant 'significantly less overhead.'
17.
by imtyler 4y ago
Idk necessarily if the issue is 'who are you paying' as much as it is 'what are the people I'm paying actually contributing.' And in the case of YouTube the answer seem to be: we created and refined some amazing vid
18.
by imtyler 4y ago
AFAK, Traditionally it was: Producer pays for content and profit is derived from distributers that charge for access to the content. If people don't view money is lost. YouTube is different: Creators pay to create their own content and
19.
by imtyler 4y ago
So, an average person can make a living wage on income from YouTube/Twitch royalties?
20.
by imtyler 4y ago
"...she’s also scared of taking days off, mainly because she knows it’s a job..." At risk of sounding cold, why would anyone think YouTube/Twitch is a job? Honestly confused. Is there money there? Like, for an average person,
21.
by imtyler 4y ago
Is there any service that presents an elegant solution to managing actual identities on the Internet? If not, it seems like a real problem that needs solving. I understand people value the ability to express themselves anonymously, but I&#x
22.
by imtyler 4y ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to assert? I'm not aware of a ile scale of brilliance. I also don't know why a history or libertarianism is relevant? I just think that the comment wasn't constructive.
23.
by imtyler 4y ago
Unless you provide reasoning this comes across as needlessly snide.
24.
by imtyler 6y ago
Apple patented a system to do this in 2016[1] but has yet to implement it afaik. [1] https://m.dpreview.com/news/0190365065/apple-patents-system-...
25.
by imtyler 7y ago
In addition to being somewhat condescending, your language seems to imply that an employee is never justified in questioning their company. For instance, you've said "why people feel" instead of "why this person felt.&qu
26.
by imtyler 7y ago
The comparison isn't wrong, it's nonsensical. It's like comparing the mortality rate of heart surgery to that of psychotherapy because they're both performed by doctors. If I died from talking to a therapist then, yes, I
27.
by imtyler 7y ago
Sure, but that's not what I've taken issue with. Once again, my issue is that you appear to have falsely compared flight safety to car safety despite the fact that the two operate in very different ways.
28.
by imtyler 7y ago
Respectfully, my objection is the implication that people should be okay with an "acceptable rate of mortality" for air travel because there's a relatively high rate of mortality for automobile travel (which is unrelated.)
29.
by imtyler 7y ago
You're comparing the mortality rate of automobile travel to that of aircraft travel. Would you also compare the rates at which the two forms of travel are subject to, say, bird collisions? Comparing the two is drawing a false equivalen
30.
by imtyler 7y ago
I'm a fan of what Disney did with MoviesAnywhere-- buy a movie once and it becomes playable through all participating linked providers. So you can, for instance, buy a movie on Amazon and play it back on iTunes. The catch being that it

More ›