451–460 of 495 posts
The “hopes you weren't paying attention” part of the headline seems needlessly inflammatory. All I see is demand rising into a supply-limited market (GPUs and RAM). That doesn’t seem nefarious, just high-school economics.
GPU and RAM supply doesn't change over the course of one weekend usually though. So there would have been no reason not to wait until Monday or do it before Saturday.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPU and RAM supply doesn't change over the course of one weekend usually though. So there would have been no reason not to wait until Monday or do it before Saturday.
The week begins on Sunday, that's the reason to not do it on Monday.
In many calendar applications one can actually configure things like that. Often the option is directly named something like "start week on Monday/Sunday".
We also shouldn't neglect the fact, that other cultures other customs. Maybe the week starts on Sunday in your location, maybe it doesn't in my location.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did Hong Kong destroy its financial sector to deny China a "major prize"? If someone were going to invade and occupy your country, would you destroy your huge source of revenue so they couldn't claim it as a "major prize"? And then what? Stay poor? I feel like people who repeat this view (something they read somewhere) haven't really analyzed it in a social, economic, historical, and geopolitical context. Because if…
Committing to threats/promises "illogically" gives you a better negotiating position. Acting "illogically" to spite bad behavior leads to less bad behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the harm in being notified when you buy gas? It doesn’t hurt anything, and I DO want to be notified if someone else buys gas on my card! The discussion started as a way to avoid forgetting to cancel subscriptions or to catch subscription price increases; if you are setting your limit to $100, you aren’t going to be seeing charges for almost all your subscriptions. I have my minimum set to $0, so I see all the…
Alert fatigue. Most people, if they get an alert for every single purchase they make, will learn to ignore the alerts as they are useless 99% of the time. Then when an alert comes through that would be useful, they won't see that either. Anyone who has had the misfortune to work on monitoring systems knows the very fine line you have to walk when choosing what alerts to send. Too few, or too many, and the system beco…
If I get an alert and I didn’t buy anything, it makes me think about it. Often times it just reminds me of a subscription I have, and I take the moment the think if I still need it or not. If I start feeling like I am getting a lot of that kind of alert, I need to reevaluate the number of subscriptions I have.
If I get an alert and I don’t immediately recognize the source (the alert will say the amount and who it is charged to), it certainly makes me pause and try to figure out what it is, and that has not been “alert fatigued” away from me even after 10+ years of these alerts.
Basically, if I get an alert when I didn’t literally JUST make a purchase, it is worth looking into.
I dont think it causes alert fatigue; I am not getting a bunch of false alerts throughout my day, because I shouldn’t be having random charges appear if I am not actively buying something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let them profit off commercial real estate, or a million other things that capitalism provides. The nestle statements about profiting off people’s need for drinking water were universally viewed as disgusting. We shouldn’t always profit off the basic needs of other humans.
This list gets long pretty quick once you start it though. I'm sure you could say the same for healthcare & education. In doing so, according to a cursory google search, you just removed profit from ~40% of GDP. That's going to be felt. Propose pivoting our entire economy all you want, but do it in a way that doesn't cripple it and provides more than a one sided benefit masquerading as having no downside implications…
Yes. In fact, every developed country already does.
> you just removed profit from ~40% of GDP
Is the point of society to maximize profit all the time at the expense of other things, or to provide a good life for people and ensure their basic needs are met?
> provides more than a one sided benefit masquerading as having no downside implications
Of course there are downsides. Rich people will be less rich. Lower class people won’t be so easy to exploit. People will be happier and more content, so there will be less crime and less people in prison.
The fact you prioritize profits over people is both illuminating and horrific. What a terrible place you must live in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This makes no sense. China doesn't want Taiwan because of TSMC, it wanted Taiwan long before TSMC was a major player. The only effect of destroying factories would be to make Taiwan poorer, while China would still get what it wanted.
You're right that this isn't why China want's Taiwan. But the point is that it would also make China poorer. In fact, it would be highly likely to cause a global recession of a magnitude that could threaten the Chinese government due to pressure from it's own citizens.
- GPU prices rising - RAM prices rising - hard drive prices rising Are we looking at a future where home computers are replaced by thin clients and all the power lies in subscription services? ‘You don't need storage space, use our cloud subscription’ ‘You don’t need processing power, stream your games through our subscription service.’ Game publishers have already publicly floated the idea of not selling their games…
The future is coming in hot. Just look at what's happening lately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Committing to threats/promises "illogically" gives you a better negotiating position. Acting "illogically" to spite bad behavior leads to less bad behavior.
No one believes it, so it won't strengthen your negotiating position. It's an unconfirmed rumour of unknown origin, and nobody is taking it seriously. And you're missing the historical context, which makes TSMC irrelevant to China's claims.
- GPU prices rising - RAM prices rising - hard drive prices rising Are we looking at a future where home computers are replaced by thin clients and all the power lies in subscription services? ‘You don't need storage space, use our cloud subscription’ ‘You don’t need processing power, stream your games through our subscription service.’ Game publishers have already publicly floated the idea of not selling their games…
Also check the agenda 2030. The European digital wallet. The cyberscore.
All those elements together makes a digital Europe (and more) where there's no cash anymore, where your website has to be compliant to be working with EU's ID and payments systems.
It's going to be all centralised and about subscriptions, no matter if it's about your electricity bill or your groceries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This list gets long pretty quick once you start it though. I'm sure you could say the same for healthcare & education. In doing so, according to a cursory google search, you just removed profit from ~40% of GDP. That's going to be felt. Propose pivoting our entire economy all you want, but do it in a way that doesn't cripple it and provides more than a one sided benefit masquerading as having no downside implications…
> I'm sure you could say the same for healthcare & education Yes. In fact, every developed country already does. > you just removed profit from ~40% of GDP Is the point of society to maximize profit all the time at the expense of other things, or to provide a good life for people and ensure their basic needs are met? > provides more than a one sided benefit masquerading as having no downside implications Of course th…
I’m arguing for not just making one single law that X must be profit free as an entire industry without considering anything else. The government here would not provide housing. It would not invest in hospitals. It would not build universities. It would just ban them from being profitable and we’d all suffer because of the lack of supply that results. I think the difference here is I’m thinking if the practical implications of how it would be executed and you’re imagining some hypothetical scenario when it’s executed well. The fact other nations do it isn’t reassuring to me, precisely because we have proven time and time again that we will flat out refuse to look outward for ideas that are effective. We have to put our own stamp on it and mess it up, or just do nothing.