In some cases yes, in others no. I mean it would satisfy some needs of creativity, community and obviously specific software needs. Sometimes, people can also earn money from donations. But, mostly there’s not enough monetary gain to satisfy the needs of food and housing.

I remember having what I currently want

I find it crazy how many people here are making it sound like it’s torture to use Windows. I get that they prefer Linux, but for many it seems like it goes way beyond normal preference to something that’s a core part of their identiny.

I use it in Firefox. I think I had to make some cookie exceptions or something like that to make it work, but it’s functional. Still buggy, but Teams has always been buggy for me no matter the platform.

To me, that sounds like the risk you should have to take if you’re accepting shares as payment and holding onto them. The inital tax makes sense because it is effectively an income, then that value used as a benchmark for legitimate capital gains makes sense too. If it goes down then that’s just a loss due to the shares decreasing in value… You could always just sell them off when they vest…

I thought Yuzu also didn’t include the keys. They had instructions on how you could copy them from a device you owned. Or was that something different?

We accepted control at expense of convenience

I would have thought it would be more accurate to say we accepted convenience at the expense of privacy and security…

Why would the ATO care? Purple Pingers’ list might actually help it become occupied.

People seem to hate the title but hopefully it lures in some ignorant people who would ask that and teach them why science changing is a good thing.

Looks like he’s living the dream

Looks like bad photoshop more than AI

I’m sure there’s way better examples than the president. He’s in an entirely unique position and can do things that would land anyone else in prison.

I wish the guy who assaulted me went to prison for it… or anything, really.

Just want to let you know I feel for you. Really sorry that happened to you and that this kind of thing does happen. I hope you don’t let it continue to reduce your quality of life.

I do feel like a lot of self proclaimed feminists are dismissive of sexual assault against men. I’ve often seen responses like “but it’s men who are usually the perpetrators”, which I think really shows they’re coming from an us vs them perspective and they don’t have much empathy for the male victims, because of their gender.

So you don’t think inclusive language is important?

Hmm, this is an interesting line of thought. I’ve always thought these movements are dominated by left leaning people and the left usually understands the importance of inclusive wording. So why do they use such exclusive labels?

Surely many people do try to jump at that low hanging fruit and adopt more inclusive labels. But, I guess it’s not an idea that spreads so easily? These movements must rely on people with strong feelings on specific issues and have to target them with a label they can identify with. I guess the more moderate majority would associate with other terms, but don’t have the motivation to take much action in the name of it.

I’m confused… There’s an Android Auto WiFi that’s available while you’re driving around?

I think the ideal is that it would be a conscious decision to donate more to software that needs more work. It definitely wouldn’t be good to encourage poor usability that creates more usage time. (That’s how we ended up with terribly written recipes all over the internet that make you scroll for ages before you get to the useful information)

Have you tried being less of a prick about it?

Maybe bigotry is the wrong word in this case, but maybe not. Either way it’s still discriminating based on an unchangeable characteristic of those people. I’d be equally annoyed if they targeted men or a specific race or an eye colour. I just think that when you try to help people, you should try to discriminate on circumstance, not things like race or gender. And we should be calling it out so people can do better in the future.

I do know there is a lot of correlation between gender and circumstance, but I think it’s either lazy to use gender as a proxy or they really are bigoted.

On the other hand I would still like to give them props for helping people in a significant way.

I wish these kinds of services could target specific at risk groups, not a gender.

I would be happy if it was focused on homeless parents with young children, or homeless victims of family violence. With those things they might still end up getting only women, but at least they’d be selected based on their situation instead of bigotry.