6 years of age would put me in 1978.

There is a lot I could do from that point onward, that would make $10M look like spare change. Like investing in Apple, or working with Tim Berners-Lee to more effectively launch an Internet that could better resist corporatization and enshittification.

Watched the whole. Damn. Thing.

Wow. I’m not prone to being maudlin, but this video is bittersweet.

Unless a company is an employee-owned socialist-style worker’s collective, employees generally have no say in that decision. A company can be every bit as evil as their owners want to be. Just look at Google or Facebook or Twitter.

And the problem in America is that for anyone making less than six figures (and many making below seven or even eight figures), their ability to protest any decision made by their employer is heavily constrained by a combination of the employer’s ability to fire them at a moment’s notice and the medical insurance that is tied to their job. Thanks to these two pincer-like forces, employee’s free choices in America are heavily constrained in the interests of capitalism and the Parasite Class.

And even if the “owners” want to be less evil, they themselves are often constrained by their investors, who force them to either toe the line or hurt all of their employees with unemployment and likely destitution and extreme hardship.

Because why bring needless suffering to those (the employees) who cannot do anything to avoid it, when they desperately need their jobs to survive in this capitalistic hellhole? Why punish the innocent employees who are just wanting to successfully put one financial foot in front of the other?

As any sort of CEO, your decisions should be for the financial well-being of your employees, first, which means knuckling under to the political demands of your current investor overlords. After all, if your decisions just put your entire workforce out of work because your investors pulled all of their money, your decision was a horrible one.

Granted, investors with odious ideologies should have been avoided from the start, but hindsight is always 20/20. Sometimes stuff like that isn’t just a known unknown, but even a complete unknown unknown.

And once you have an uncontrollably influential investor, your only choice might be to protect the economic welfare of your employees over an ideological stance that could easily make many of them homeless or even dead.

Or, they back him and acknowledge that they supported genocide but have since realised how wrong they were?

And then they all lose their jobs when the investor(s) pulls out. Did you not read the comment you were replying to?

If it’s a choice between one person losing their job and everyone losing their jobs, you are either rationally pragmatic to just one person or you are ideologically scorched-earth to everyone else.

I mean, if you are someone in a manglement position who has to pull that particular trigger you could also resign in protest, but at least that only torpedos your own career, and not the jobs of dozens of other people who work alongside you.

When you deny reality, I guess any kind of statement sounds reasonable.

The only thing Austerity does is screw over the working-class person to avoid inconveniencing any member of the Parasite Class with higher taxes.

Anyone implementing Austerity doesn’t give even a single f**k about any Average Joe/Jane, they’re doing this purely to help those with obscene levels of personal wealth avoid paying their fair share of the social contract.

Companies have also become so adverse - and I would even characterize it as hostile - to investing any effort into employees that they want to have any new hire to “hit the ground running”.

Ergo, they interview over and over again, using wildly diverse testing methods and querying for every possible needed skill, and getting tied up in analysis paralysis in their attempt to find the “perfect candidate”.

With the very predictable result of all the good candidates withdrawing for other opportunities - because the smart companies don’t conduct torture via incessant interviews, they jump to provide offers once basic thresholds have been met - leaving only the mediocre and substandard applicants.

This is why you hear certain companies lament the low quality of applicants, or descend clear down to “bUt No-OnE wAnTs To WoRk!!1!” when their toxic interview methods chase everyone away.

people are still crazy in on Obama being the cause of all our problems

That’s how you know that someone is ideologically contaminated and running completely facts-free: they blame everything on someone who has absolutely no relevance to the situation.

Libertarianism requires its members to engage in due diligence in order to execute their libertarian ideals properly and make the choices that are correct for them.

This, unfortunately, excludes the lower-60% of all Americans, who are so ground down, economically terrorized, and mentally overwhelmed with their daily struggles to survive that they have little to no opportunity to approach any major choice with anything even vaguely in the realm of due diligence. They just don’t have the headspace to do so, and are forced to spend all their available mental efforts on just putting one financial foot in front of the other.

This is why having social support frameworks enforced/provided/funded by the government is so important for so many working-class people - it allows them to put those issues on autopilot, significantly reducing their own cognitive load and allowing them to better process the most important issues in their lives.

Ergo, libertarianism is a wealthy person’s toy. It is something that they can champion, because only they have the economic options and financial freedom to fully and properly engage with it.

Until everyone has vanishingly few catastrophic-level issues on the horizon (like one missed paycheque leading to homelessness, or a sudden illness leading to medical bankruptcy), any attempt to implement libertarianism will only bring mass amounts of misery and destroyed lives to anyone beneath the Parasite Class.

And when you have those kinds of widespread government-provided supports that lift all boats - and not just the megayachts - why bother with libertarianism? We should continue to use what got everyone into that safe state in the first place – socialism.

Remember, the Parasite Class already uses socialism for themselves. It’s called grants and bailouts and subsidies, and allows the Parasite Class to privatize the profits and socialize the losses.

It’s just at a scale that makes it impossible for working-class people to leverage.

This planet has too many humans.

Note that I said this planet has and not there are. Because I am a misanthrope, not a monster.

I just see so much stupidity out there, so much anti-human/selfish alt-right politics and so much hate-based religion that is only designed to hurt/control/kill others and so many people stuck in intellectual latrines without even the desire to get out of them and holding up cultivated ignorance like it’s a point of pride.

If I had the money to move to a mountain property in some temperate rainforest where I had a house and a large garden that could produce most of my yearly food and a few tens of thousands of books, I would gladly go months at a time without seeing anyone. Better yet if it’s in a secluded valley that doesn’t even look like it exists except on maps or from the air, and an access road that looks utterly uninteresting such that no-one even thinks of going down it.

Pick any religion, and you will find violent extremists.

With that said, Sikhs don’t hold a candle to Islam or Christianity when it comes to violent extremists.

Definitely a fan of Levi’s, especially the high-waisted models. I intensely dislike the feeling of my pants being about to fall off, so low-waisted is out. The 516 is my favourite, although I also have 541s, 501s, 505s, and 550s.

someone without insurance rear-ended my vehicle but I chose not to pursue it because then my own insurance rates would’ve gone up.

Somehow, this sounds deeply wrong. Your insurance should cover you regardless of what happens. If it’s an act of god, the insurance company should just swallow those costs. If it’s caused by a third party who is not their customer, they should go after the company that insured the other party, or the other party directly if uninsured.

No matter what the circumstances, if you are not at fault you should never see an increase in your rates, no matter how catastrophic the damage or the costs to make it right.

As a Canadian looking from the outside in, it really does seem to be trending in that direction… any further Republican wins will mean the end of democracy, with America sliding into a ChristoFascist Autocracy.

I fear for my American neighbours, but we have similar problems up here; we just happen to be a decade or so behind you folk.

Passing cables through existing walls nearly always involves taking part of the drywall off to gain access to the core of the wall. If you need to feed a wire across an entire wall, you typically have to cut an entire strip of drywall off along the entire length of the wall.

If you have access to the beams beneath the floor or in the ceiling, you may want to do most of the run there, then drill into the desired wall through the sill or header plate. That allows you to get the cable into a specific stud gap to limit the amount of drywall affected.

But unless your house was built with cable pipes/runs built into it (and I can’t imagine this being done outside of commercial buildings), you have lots of futzing around to do, and no small amount of drywall work.

If you feel you’re nothing more than a new set of clothes to a potential partner, that may be a you-problem.

It’s not being a new set of clothes to a potential partner.

It’s putting your heart into an existing relationship, and then seeing it discarded so immediately and abruptly that it seems like all your efforts to date have been deemed worthless, and by proxy, that you yourself have always been worthless despite your own buy-in into the relationship.

And sweet gaslighting, placing all of the blame and responsibility onto the guy. So predictable.

It takes two to tango. The chance of the guy being entirely at fault is, statistically speaking, equal to the chances of the woman being entirely at fault. That’s what equality means.

It’s one thing to be approached with a list of issues for months or years, and doing nothing about them. That is a “you-problem”.

It’s quite another thing to be sailing along without a clue in the world and then be staring down a combo hit of previously-unvoiced complaints plus a breakup demand. That is an insult wearing lame-duck-excuse clothing being slapped in your face.

If she has reached out to you, her mind is likely already made up, and any attempt to argue against the breakup will be unproductive and might even be seen as hostile.

Close that door firmly but politely, and don’t ever allow it to be re-opened. Even now, see the relationship as being in your rear-view mirror; useful as a learning experience to grow upon, but no longer a going concern.

Also be prepared to see her (in her social media posts, etc.) with someone else within 24-48hrs. Women rarely leave a relationship without having another one already lined up. Most men don’t employ this strategy whatsoever, which can make this kind of behaviour deeply painful and dehumanizing for us.

I mean, we’re still mourning the loss of the relationship, and seeing this is like a kick in the nuts – a woman’s ability to move on so quickly makes it seem like the relationship (and by proxy, us) had absolutely no meaning to her whatsoever, as if we never had any more value to her than a change of clothing.

This is the current state of American healthcare.

Canadian conservatives have been taking notes for years, and have begun the privatization of our single-payer healthcare, with Ontario and Alberta leading the charge.

I fully expect this dystopian nightmare to hit our country within the next decade if the Federal government doesn’t take healthcare out of the province’s hands and make it a public utility or crown corporation that legally cannot be sold off or dismantled.

DotNet Core as a whole (C# + F# + other languages that are being ported to compile down to a DotNet binary).

Because it has all the things Java promised us - frictionless, painless, cross-platform programs - but is implementing it far better than Java ever could.

Honestly, DotNet Core is now at least a half-decade or more ahead of Java in terms of the base platform and C# language functionality/ease-of-use. The only advantage Java has at this point is it’s community ecosystem of third-party features and programs.

Cable management doesn’t matter if:

1. You only care if it works
2. You have the accumulated memories of trillions of prior drones, including the ones who built that mess in the first place, so you already know what each cable does and where it goes.