But holy shit a marvel of marketing. Better be a case study in business school. They had little to no actual implementation for years and years but are still the go-to name for autonomous driving and selling subscriptions to something that doesn’t exist. Absolutely wild.

Off topic. But I can’t help but rate the trash cans.

• 1995: Excellent can. Obviously not that many pixels to work with but it is clear, legible and clean.
• 1998: I mean its fine, but a bit of a downgrade. Why so much black? Especially that top rim that apparently was painted black. The shading on the arrows also just hurts legibility, why do 2D arrows have shading anyways?
• 2000: Nope. The only good thing about it is that it is throwing away Windows. The shading is to simple arrows are strange colours and lacks a sense of depth.
• 2001: I don’t love the theme but the execution is great. It looks clean shiny and bright. The only real weird thing is the bag inside, it is a bit strangely round despite seemingly not going over the edge.
• 2006: This is a nice refinement of the last one. Cleaner look, skip the bag, more realistic trash. This is the second best executed after 1995.
• 2015: This one is bland and lacks contrast and detail. The arrows are also oddly stubby for some reason. It’s not bad, but also not good.

This is one of those things that must have been an absolute shit thing to discover the first time. Sure now we are ready and can prepare. But having to diagnose and improvise a solution would not be pleasant.

This is the advantage of decentralization over federation. IMHO the fact that Lemmy is only federated really hurts it. Not so much for user accounts (in theory these can be backed up restored and moved. Not ideal but not awful) but in that communities are tied to servers. When the server a community is on goes away it is hugely damaging to that community.

Of course nixpkgs has it. It was added a few years ago, I can’t vouch for if it is up to date or still working.

This helps protect our community.

I hate when companies lie to my face. Watching a video anonymously is not harming anyone except maybe a fraction of a cent of cost to Google. If I was posting a comment or something maybe, but oh, you already need to be logged in for that.

And I would go so far as to say that nobody who is buying 36 TB spinners is doing offsite backups of that data.

Was this a typo? I would expect that almost everyone who is buying these is doing offsite backups. Who has this amount of data density and is ok with losing it?

Yes, they are quite possibly using tape for these backups (either directly or through some cloud service) but you still want offsite backups. Otherwise a bad fire and you lose it all.

I uh, wouldn’t recommend that with fire bars.

aren’t striping

I think you mean “are striping”.

But even with striping you have backups right? Local redundancy is for availability, not durability.

I don’t think the target audience of this drive is buying one. They are trying to optimize for density and are probably buying in bulk rather than paying the $800 price tag.

with no changes to the salary they received during the production stage

But this just isn’t how it works. These people aren’t paid minimum wage. This will definitely be played in salary negotiation as part of the compensation and will almost certainly result in less base salary.

So now the studio is shifting some risk onto the workers.

I don’t know if I really buy “not doing much of the work”. Middle management maybe but to own and run a company is serious work. Especially starting a company is huge risk. So if you take the risk you get a lot of the reward.

IMHO ways to help even this out are:

1. Higher taxes on the wealthy. Keep that progressive tax curve going (and not regressing). I think these people do deserve to be rewarded, but up to a point. Honestly I think the tax rate should approach 100% as you approach the very highest percentile of income.
2. Universal basic income. Make it so that people don’t need to work. They get to choose to work when the compensation is worth it to them. This makes explotation much harder and makes it much easier for people to negotiate fair compensation (whether that is salary, profit sharing, a mix or something else).

I would also like to see some way to change the natural goal of a company from “make as much money as possible” to “bring as much value to people as possible”, but I think these two things would be a good start.

I would be a bit careful with this.

1. It is incredibly hard to define each worker’s contribution to any particular profit.
2. It means that the worker’s compensation depends on the overall success of the product which may have little to do with their work (for example bad management tanking a project or it getting cancelled before release).
3. Accounting can move profits around in a lot of cases. Look at how every movie makes no money.

In many ways having it be a transaction (work x hours get paid x dollars) is nice. I means that the employee knows exactly what they are getting upfront.