salvar

I'm always amazed at peoples' ability to observe users, and when user behaviour doesn't match up with the intended design, think "Hmm... the users have a pervasive misunderstanding. They need to be educated to understand the design."

Could it be that the model you describe doesn't fit the mental model of a typical human very well? Could the cause of this "pervasive misunderstanding" be bad design, rather than dumb users?

Speaking from an Icelandic perspective, I think the 'love of socialism' stems from the fact that we've pretty much always needed to rely on one another to just survive in the harsh living conditions. Of course, these conditions have improved drastically since the early 20th century but I think a lot of the culture remains.

Are you claiming that Bluetooth can never be useful for anyone because you don't find it useful?

Well, saying things like "I think that period marked the true shift of the internet from a tech oriented population to the "normie" population" as if it's bad that other people get to enjoy the Internet, comes off as pretty damn smug.

Yes, I'm sure the code is ready but some evil mastermind twisted their mustache and said "No... let's collect two weeks more of data! Bwahahahaha!"

Ok let's be clear about that. Now what? There _is_ a household with one parent and 5+ children. Unless you have a time machine you can't undo that. What do you do about that household? Telling the parents that they made bad decisions actually doesn't do much to help the children. How do you help the children?

Of course personal responsibility comes into play. But what do you want to do about it? The child already exists and we can't go back in time, so no preventing that. Do we give the child the best opportunity it can get, or somehow use it to punish the parents for their decision making?

So should we try to do more or less of it?

> I mean, if I'm in some 3rd world country without a reliable public transport system

Do you honestly think it's a binary choice? Either the public transport system is reliable, or it's a 3rd world country? This seems disingenuous.

Just to take an example: Southern Rail in the UK. It's notoriously unreliable, and journeys get cancelled or delayed all the time for various reasons, including strikes, weather, staff shortages and leaves on the tracks. I've saved countless hours from going to waste by keeping up to date on the schedule in real time. For this I need a smart phone. Is the UK a 3rd world country?

You have some valid points but it's like you feel compelled to reject all possible benefits put forward by OP. On this one you are objectively wrong.

Is that forbidden?

Do you lay out the complete policy when meeting some one, or just as you feel you need to explain it? I'm imagining meeting someone who starts by saying "Before we begin, I'd like you to read over my human interaction policy".

Interesting how you completely read the mental state of these people just by seeing them at the botanical gardens.

I a billion dollar business the only definition of a successful one?

Sure, but is it a binary thing? Either zero control of information or total control of information and nothing in between? That seems wrong.

A $2 million game will cost (more or less) the same to develop whether it goes on to sell 1, 100, 10000 or 10 million copies. The cost of producing a handbag depends a whole lot on how many you need to produce.

So assuming that shipping more copies is very cheap once the game is developed, what do you do when you get $6 million in funding for a $2 million game?

Completely agree with all of this. I believe the people describing their problems with open offices, but I'm just not at all one of them. I'd love if the conversation was less about open space offices being objectively bad for everyone, and more about finding a balance for both people who hate them and people who prefer them.

Ah, I did. Thanks. I thought it was a writer/editor couple with a child.

It's a father setting rules for his daughter (and himself while he's at it). Of course it's biased. What's odd about that? I'd understand if this was published as a study, but it's literally a NY Times article telling a story.

I guess there was some truth to that Friends episode.

I downloaded a bunch of videos for watching on the train when my commute was 3 hours and the 4G connection was absolute shit. Youtube-dl saved my sanity.

I wouldn't call it hyperbole at all once you learn about Elsagate.

I get your point, but aren't you writing this on an online message board that's essentially a slightly different kind of substitute for human contact?

Isn't the point here that there are too many what-ifs to state that a strong US military is good for everyone?

I was just wondering if he included himself in the "people" group.

> People in general are far too immature to discuss politics.

But not you, right?

What kind of social network could exist where no one besides the author can modify the content or privacy settings of their posts? I'm guessing every user would have to self-host their own content?

Would you say the same to a black person who objects to a "Whites only" sign in a store window?

So a sign that says "No black people here" is totally fine?

What? Am I supposed to go ID some people off images on the internet? Is that your idea of supporting your argument?

Please go on for at least a paragraph, if you can. I don't think these pictures say much.