peterangular

God the fact this comment keeps going gray really bothers me. You're 100% correct and these people are acting lawfully.

I get that HN often swings conservative, but I gotta believe if we were in these folk's shoes some of us would be seeking a better life for ourselves through asylum in America.

I think it's a valid conversation to have in parallel when the people/politicians in these places are pulling expensive political stunts that do nothing but stoke the ever-increasing polarization of our nation... only to turn around and shamelessly ask for aide in such a situation.

Sorry, but it's a bad look.

> I mean is it irresponsible to live in a hurricane prone area?

Climate change really doesn't have an opinion on this. Here's a paper from the EPA:

"What Climate Change Means for Puerto Rico"

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files...

As someone who believes climate change is fact, if I had the economic mobility to move my life away from such an area I would. Sorry if this seems harsh, but people much smarter than me agree that these areas are going to be prone to worse and worse conditions in the coming decades.

> If catastrophic hurricanes are really going to happen every 10 years, should the federal government be subsidizing the coastal lifestyle and building you a new house each time?

No.

Unlike other subsidies there is no greater economic/societal good created from people having their costal homes. And, unlike other disaster situations, hurricanes in that region are an outright guarantee.

Also, this is just going to keep getting worse with climate change.

I agree with Calgary. People are free to live there, but not on my dime.

I mean I can make up ad hominem analogies about this stuff too - but it practice it makes people feel attacked/defensive, and rarely ever adds nuance or context to the conversation. I feel like in this situation it could have been omitted as-per HN guidelines:

> In Comments:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky.

I'd posit that it's not as simple. Maybe if you're just cranking out your one-off app or something of the sort...

But getting a good replication setup that's HA, potentially across multiple regions/zones, all abstracted under K8s - yea. That's not trivial. And, it can go very wrong.

> I bet you also hate on people making their own espresso instead of just going to starbucks

This is just unnecessary.

> What exactly is the fear of dulled senses? What are you gaining by being a bit sharper on Friday night that drinkers are losing? Is anything actually lost?

If I drink even a drink or two I can definitely tell a difference in my performance the next day. I'm a bit more lethargic, not necessarily as alert, it's harder to get on the treadmill etc. When I was in my 20's it was honestly the same, but I just had more energy/gumption to work against it.

I do drink, but I have to say I've just been getting less and less into it. I gotta admit I still really love expensive beers.

> I would guess the average casual drinker dismisses the person that is worried about "staying sharp" as being uptight or unnecessarily rigid, because as you said, life is short and who really gives a damn about being 100% cognitive all the time?

Dealt with this too - I really don't care about my public image. Anymore, I almost outright refuse to drink at work events... and if the social pressure gets too crappy I just go get some random drink and nurse it at half way for hours. This the only place I've been pressured or discretely judged for not drinking. The only reason I lie by nursing a single drink is because people will assume the worst - that I am/was an alcoholic (this has happened).

I'm just not here to impress, and anyone passing judgement about someone else's lack of alcohol consumption is a loser. Seriously.

One more thought - when it comes to being "100%" - yeah... I find myself wanting to be at my best more and more. I think it's just maturing a bit and realizing time is waning. Even the stuff I do to relax I've noticed is more enhanced by sobriety vs. with alcohol.

Yes.

If that's what it takes for public sector employees to be well taken care of. Unironically, yes.

> as a fellow human

That's not what we were discussing - we were discussing you valuing them as an employee. Which if you devalue their labor output then, yes, you certainly devalue them as an employee. Saying "I value them as a human" is an entirely different concern/conversation IMO.

Sorry about the semantics, but I fully believe you devalue self-checkout cashiers as employees after this conversation.

Regardless - we're off in the weeds. I don't think we're in a productive conversation. Respectfully, I'm bowing out.

Yea. I'm just not thrilled to be returning to Firefox after over a decade of Chrome use. 2023 is going to be rough with the removal of the webRequest extension API.

I feel like Mozilla is having an identity crisis - but then again... when were they not.

Gotcha. I just find the self-checkout/cashier bit moot to my original point. I could have easily said "retail employees," or "the guy who makes my subs." Swap out "cashier" with any entry-level/lower-skilled position and that's my core point.

> And maybe it’s good that those jobs are going away? I’d rather society have to answer some hard questions about UBI than keep humans working in jobs that aren’t necessary.

Seeing the backlash for just $10k worth of student debt forgiveness I do not think that we're even close to conversations like that. The notion of people's base needs being met regardless of working is even less palatable to the general riffraff because we've been sold such a zero-sum game here. We're crabs in a bucket. People go to lengths to make sure someone they perceive as less-than doesn't get a "handout."

I have grown very, very pessimistic about people's empathy in regards to the ever-growing economic divide. What I've experienced in America is "I've got mine, f u" - I'm a millennial maybe that gives some context.

---

> Certainly I don’t devalue the employee, but I don’t value the work they do.

Also, I wasn't going to address this, but... to me that is 100% saying that you devalue the employee. If I devalue someone's labor output, I'm devaluing them as an employee - simple. I find this sentence to be a outright contradiction.

> could bargain for a living wage

That's called collective bargaining and the only way we'll end up there is strong unions. Otherwise, I promise you - most companies will not altruistically ensure their employees are taken care of; exceptions exist like Costco. Someone's going to need to bend their arm, be it a union or the government through regulation.

Also I'm not sure I understand your comment. The first sentence feels like you're devaluing the service employee that helps resolve your self-checkout issues? Then, the next paragraph you posit that we're in a transitionary period from a "legacy system" - this just isn't how I see it.

From convenience stores, to grocery, etc. there will always be the need for traditional cashiers, along side of self-checkout folks. And, personally - I believe they both deserve a dignified wage that covers their base needs (rent, car, medical, etc) without necessarily having to "bargain for a living wage."

IMO - even the most entry-level and lowly of jobs at 40hrs/week should be able to get someone by.

> A cashier should be able to pay rent, transport, utilities and a decent life.

Unfortunately there's a huge group of people who will vehemently oppose this as they don't see that job as deserving of basic human dignity (rent, transport, utilities, medical). Not just the ruling class, but normal every day folks poop on these people...?!

The older I get the more I'm disgusted at how many people can selectively turn off their empathy for stuff like this. In an equitable society we should take care of each other... I don't understand why a Wally World cashier making a base living wage offends so many people.

Shelter as an investment vehicle leads to consolidation. And, no one in the capital class is going to address the scarcity as it's a conflict of their interests. Rent in my city has been going insane.

At the end of the day this is all just capitalism and voting for your own interests. We optimize for this.

Windows 10 - absolutely zero issues for me. Rock-solid stability.

Here's my install notes - just make sure you don't launch Photoshop/Illustrator prematurely:

  * Skip the "setup an adobe ID" step
  * Only install "Adobe Photoshop" and "Adobe Illustrator"
  * On right-hand side deselect not needed components
    * Story Extension
    * Browser Lab
    * Air
    * Media Player
    * Device Service
    * Site Catalyst
  * Keep useful components
    * Fonts
    * Extension Manager
    * ExtendScript
  * Check both "Services" and "Task Scheduler" to make 100% the update manager did not get installed
    * Disable Adobe SwitchBoard service
  * Delete the OOBE directory from C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Adobe
  * Delete the AAMUpdaterInventory directory from C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Adobe
  * Launch Photoshop, Photoshop x64, and Illustrator for first time and skip past any registration screens
  * Reboot system and repeat previous two steps to ensure no updaters/etc. are installed and software works without warning on first load
    * NOTE: On reboot/second check it looks like a service gets scheduled so repeating these steps is important! (hooks on reboot by Adobe installer)
  * Type "Startup Apps" and ensure all Adobe apps not starting with system

> Also completely remove Pocket and anything else like it.

Yeah - hard agree. Pocket feels like a sheer gimmick. It cheapens the experience, and it hurts the trust people have for Firefox when they jam it in your face.

I remember the original Firefox ethos where it was just a browser, and that was awesome.

Adobe CS5 user here - 12 year old software.

CS5 Master Suite w/discs and valid serial from a reputable seller on eBay still commands $200-300+ which is nuts to me. But, when I realize that I can do all of my modern graphics workflow in this 12 year old software I get it.

I would love to use some of the newer parts of the suite but the functionality of my CS5 still 100% covers my use-case. For photography I've ended up on Darktable, and if I need to manually retouch a photo there's nothing stopping me from a Darktable <> Photoshop CS5 workflow.

As much as I want to love Gimp - I can't. It is outright ineffective and lacks features compared to even my 12 year old Photoshop. The people who continue to tout it as a 1:1 replacement have never worked in a professional graphics workflow.

Also, Procreate is amazing for doing illustrations though - I really wish I had it when I was learning digital painting!

---

Regardless, just wandering sharing anecdotes because I relate to your experiences. Hard agree that legacy versions of Photoshop (and honestly the entire suite) are still insanely powerful. I also find them to be way more stable than their newer counterparts. They're just objectively a better financial decision - I bought this a decade ago and I don't have a monthly $50-60 Adobe draw on my bank account.

I understand where you're coming from. We likely have very different views on welfare and the compassion of society.

> But there are likely more who are lazy, dull, and sucking up resources that could better be used to improve society.

So should we should allocate resources away from the undesirables and let them and their children starve off?

I think that sorta thinking is inhumane, and not becoming of a civil society.

> Many of the people here are becoming sociopathic

Tons of people here are well monied professionals who struggle to put themselves into another person's shoes. They grew up privileged, got to go to school/college, and ended up on a good career path. They're people who will unironically say people should "pull themselves up by the bootstraps," and claim that we're in a meritocracy where hard work guarantees financial stability + success.

They have no idea what it's like for a person struggling to get by, and they've been sold a lifetime of "poor person = bad," or "poor person = lazy" propaganda.

There are lots of people here that struggle with basic empathy.

> I think if we're privileged enough to be having this conversation at all, it's probably tough for either of us to really put ourselves in the shoes of the folks asked to be subjects of these videos

Eh, my parents hated each other, and subsequently took a great deal of it out on their kids - both emotionally and physically. Then my father died when I was 14. Within months my mom ended up dating, then married to a felon who had stole from his own pharmacy losing his license... Mom blamed me for her cancer... blah blah blah. I'm enough of a shit-show that I could potentially be content for that channel for trauma.

> I think almost any kind of media or art which makes many people more aware of what life is like for the 'underbelly' of society is probably still a good thing overall.

I share that anecdote because it backs up what you're saying about the value of the content... I've listened to stuff on there that's more the general mental health/generational trauma related stuff and have found it valuable. It helps me feel less isolated hearing people share stories that I can relate to.

I just feel like there's a weird line with addiction and poverty where there's potential conflict of interest - many of the folks who share their story on that channel aren't desperate by any means... I'm just conflicted over those who are =/

Yea - I wouldn't.

I'd rather not have such direct representation of myself out there - invariably people would recognize you, and invariably they would pass the video around social groups. Just the way things work in the social media era.

Also, this could really hurt you if a video with this sorta subject matter/content would be passed around your place of work. This is about to get bitter so please take with a grain of salt: I've learned that most people are gossipy and will often not give people the benefit of the doubt. People judge others to bolster their ego and elevate their own social standing. Even if it was something out of your control like childhood trauma, people will still extrapolate their own opinions.

Then there's the "nothing's ever deleted from the internet" trope - even if I needed it taken down and the original uploader agreed, the content could easily exist elsewhere. I guarantee there's people doing reaction content to this.

All-in-all I functionally can't see the benefit of doing one of these outside of $... and I agree with other posters that it's problematic. It reminds me of photography class in college where all of these kids would photograph the homeless. Everyone thought they were brilliant by shining a light on poverty or something.... Really, they were just privileged asshole kids with savior complexes waving money in front of people who didn't have the option to turn it down; only to put these people on display in school galleries where the subject of the photo would never be allowed.

You're being hyperbolic.

I said "This is why I'm generally in support over codified + regulated child protection acts, especially the online ones." This is clearly not advocating for a "nanny-state." I'll rephrase in case I was misunderstood: I am generally in support of online child protection acts.

> Am I correct to say

I think it's clear you've already made your mind up by pushing what I said to such extreme examples: "nanny-state," and claiming I'm advocating for the government to fully take care of children/adults.

I understand your ideals... but in-practice many many children don't have engaged, or even present parents. The older I get the more I believe people conflate having kids as raising kids.

I don't believe we're on a path for this to get better either.

This is why I'm generally in support over codified + regulated child protection acts, especially the online ones.

> Incidentally, not long after posting my comment I noticed a few people down-voting it without comment. Sometimes I think I should not interfere and let evolution follow its normal course (as it nearly did with me).

Often you'll catch downvotes for playing devil's advocate, even when it's very justified like in this circumstance.

I'm one of those low voltage DC noobs and I was still shocked when I saw the title... I was even more shocked by the wood burning article - people are dying playing with this stuff. If anything that Linux-powered microwave article should have a huge warning at the top outlining the risks.

I appreciate you taking the time to educate on the dangers + sharing your anecdotes.

Exactly this. In a pay-to-play legal system this person would only be risking more by litigating.

I get that we have our ideals here, but our legal system does not necessarily lead to justice - especially when asymmetric imbalances are in play.

IANAL but I would not lawyer up against a huge corporation like this and expect to keep my money.

Regardless if it's the police brushing me off over a theft, or Uvalde... it all leads to one place: the public's eroding trust in the police.

They're really not there to protect and serve. That was a LAPD marketing motto that a ton of other police departments adopted over the years for optics. The police actually have no such legal duty, and this has been upheld in court multiple times.

I am 100% on your side, but in good faith we cannot expect the police to serve us. Your "first/two" analogy is moot I'm afraid.

Not op - answering personally.

The moment you have an audience for something it significantly changes the experience. Doesn't matter if it's music, development, cooking... if other humans are involved on the receiving end it makes it different.

For a lot of us, we're very protective of our creative endeavors. And, lots of the time the journey we're taking is one of vulnerability (learning, creatively extending ourselves, taking risks).

Then there's the criticism and critique. People can objectively be pretty awful. It doesn't matter if it's making my own software tooling, or a song, or fleshing out a new idea... I just don't want to hear anyone's opinion - I want to focus on being productive in what I'm doing. I've often found that isolating is way more productive than trying to ship to an audience. If I need other people I don't pull them in as an audience, I pull them in as an advisor and/or teacher: contracting out a code review, or going to guitar lessons.

If/when this stuff I created dies with me that's OK. I'm a fart in the wind anyway, and I don't care about silly things like "legacy" - I just need to create stuff to optimize and improve the world around me. And, sometimes I create stuff just because it feels good. It's a selfish endeavor sure, but I'd have it no other way.

Ah yea you're right - I misspoke. Vanilla JS feels verbose, and jQuery feels more terse in regards to general syntax.

---

document.querySelector('#sel').addEventListener('click', (e) => {})

Feels way more verbose than the following:

$('#sel').on('click', (e) => {})

My bad - apparently the coffee hadn't sunk in yet ha.

Even as someone who's largely ripped out jQuery for vanilla JS I still totally understand why people use the API. Vanilla JS is terse comparative to jQuery short-hand syntax, especially for simple event bindings.

Sure, I think jQuery these days is largely legacy developer ergonomics... I admit there are parts of those ergonomics that I miss. Especially when comparing it to modern tool-heavy transpiled/compiled/whatever JS development which is way more opinionated than using a simple utility library.

> "every third thursday"

... nice. Other folks are beating ya up based on their first try but mine was exactly correct!

Adding to my cron tools bookmarks - cool stuff.