Same, but (at least in my case) you can’t ever listen to that bastard brain and do more than a small amount. The margin is thin and the prize of folly is being up at 3AM, yawning sleepily, but awake.
Same, but (at least in my case) you can’t ever listen to that bastard brain and do more than a small amount. The margin is thin and the prize of folly is being up at 3AM, yawning sleepily, but awake.
Those amounts aren’t USD yeah, probably habit when writing down money. The 170k and 360k figures are the WoW virtual currency aka “gold”.
There is a floor to WoW token’s gold value from what I recall (it’s been years since I interacted with Blizzard and WoW) but no ceiling.
Dunno how hard it curbed bots/unsanctioned gold sellers/fascist scum grassroots campaigns (no, really, look into Stephen Bannon and WoW gold it’s so fucking stupid) but!
Blizzard absolutely realized and then moved to take all the money that was being left on the table from 3rd party virtual currency sales, and they apply every measure and analytical tool to maximize that profit because of course.
This mount’s release is literally them inflating the price of the virtual currency ahead of real life earnings calls, because it absolutely will sell and give them the revenue infusion that the WoW token’s rise in value is meant to provide for as long as they want until it’s time to pump the numbers again with another mount/high sought store item.
A very similar variant in form and function to this mount was once available in-game and trade able with a rarity tuned that it ended up being sold for the WoW Token equivalent of ~$500 at the prices at the time, as there was no store version or similar option elsewhere.
It’s no accident that when the price of the WoW Token is at its lowest, here comes a slightly updated and dolled up version of that same highly sought mount version.
WoW is where real economics, car ownership culture, hoarding, and dopamine treadmills collide and Blizzard doesn’t just know this but have it charted on 5 year plans.
While your point that sometimes people just have AI image associated traits is very salient, I worry you might not be considering the lengths these things will be used and why online discourse (in my worried opinion) is utterly fucked: The past ain’t safe either.
For now we still have archive.org but without a third party/external source validating that old content…you can’t be sure it’s actually old content.
It’s trivial to get LLMs to get image gen prompts done to “spice up those old news posts” at best (without remembering to tag the article edited/updated or bypassing that flag entirely)…and utterly fuck the very foundation of shared and accepted past reality not just presently but to anyone using the internet itself to look through the lens of the past at worst.
Holy fuck. That is beyond the pale, and I’m sorry you had to go through that. Chills thinking how wrong that could go.
“Hey this sounds like–”
Notices community
“–Oh. Wait, was I on Lemmy relaxing or avoiding work?”
I sometimes think the only people who hate capitalism more than leftists are “successful capitalists”. It would help explain why they’ve always trended towards fascism since before the term was even coined.
Unironically yes. All of that comes at less expense to humankind, too. Even accounting for you.
For everyone else, I feel like the developers are LARPING as security professionals to make their boring job making web pages for local businesses interesting.
Wdym my 128 bit password enabled, passkey preferred, https domaines, encryption-within-box standards-meeting secure emailing webserver powered WordPress website for my little kid’s school PTA organization isn’t a viable attack vector? Of course not, you see the web firewall…
Believe what you want to believe and may it chase you as you deserve every night.
But keep your goalpost moving grubby mitts from the idea you know words or are any good with them.
Being disingenuous is piss easy and transparent, cool the back patting.
Learn to read what others comment, so that at least you can keep consistency if you’re gonna clutter public forums with your drivel.
Fuck. I cleaned everything on tax day and forgot to file!
Are we sure OP isn’t being meta? The message and demographics change if the punch is coming from other community posters.
We need to return to preindustrial population levels so the animals can too.
What exactly are you proposing?
Beware the (only) highly empathetic too, while you’re at it.
Get the right (wrong) combination and you have:
Someone who can understand and read the changes they are engendering in others, adjust manipulation in real time, feel terrible about it, but be able to justify it to themselves as improving the lot of others if they genuinely lack the intelligence to comprehend the whole “you can lead a horse to water but not make it drink” adage.
Self-awareness is tragically never a guarantee; much less using it to take responsibility for shortcomings.
You’re like a rogue, misunderstood Guru on a journey of ‘I know leave me alone, I was describing the meta-woes of seeming to carry a dearth of knowledge, not the lack itself’.
Just pointing out from a passing ship; yeah, I see the semantic headaches and agree it’s a silly maritime tradition.
This is simply because of how batteries work. We’re focusing on lithium ion batteries, the most common in computing at our current point in time, and these are simplifications and not electrical engineering down to the exactest detail.
They can only hold the max charge when brand new. As they are used (charged and discharged), literal physical wear is happening within the battery (really, series of battery cells, it is not one chunk that fails at once). The capacity for the ions to “stay” on the desired side of the anode-cathode pair diminishes over time.
This is why batteries are advertised as maintaining x amount (usually 80%) after x cycles (usually 500) and why a device having a good Battery Management System (BMS) can be as important as how many mAH units a battery is rated as having.
As to why a plugged in battery suffers the same fate? Physics is cruel. A charge cycle is just defined as using an amount equal to 100% of your battery. Nothing says it has to be all at once.
A plugged-in lithium-ion battery still undergoes wear because it experiences minor discharges and recharges, contributing to charge cycles. Heat from constant charging and chemical aging also degrade the battery over time, leading to shorter battery life when eventually used unplugged.
I can’t get over it.
You’re one neat backpack and a decent repurpose-able display tablet with a kickstand away from a dream nomad set up.
How big is this power brick that it features so strongly in the ‘cons’ column!?
Yeah caffeine is a siren song for a select few. It’s not necessarily an ‘everyone and every form of ADHD thing’, but it seems to present together often enough.
In my case it’s tricksy because the line between “this much coffee will help sleep” and “this much coffee will make you feel like it re-activated the magic conversion machine the actual ADHD meds just shut down” is about 1 oz one way or another from a 5oz cup (a real small amount in sane units, I didn’t convert).
Sensible. One taught you the consensus on what is perceived as the benchmark mind so to speak and a subset of how it ‘may go wrong’.
ADHD memes demonstrates just how much more ‘hold my beer’ that hole of ‘may go wrong’ gets.
Which is to say a lot. Hearing about the human condition vs seeing it echo in all the clucking time blind chickens.
Like most “but why US” questions, the answer starts with ‘M’ and rhymes with ‘oney’.
The dairy lobby is powerful in the US, for reasons I’ve never bothered to look into the few times one of their tantrums end up on the news.
It’s a matter of the Nexus of regulatory capture, unrestricted money in politics, and historic Inertia is my surface understanding of why ‘Dairy’ is such a bristly thing here.
They’re agreeing with you it seems to me, and sharing their anecdotes that despite that reality which they agree with, let me re-emphasize that, despite that reality (that using one gender’s struggles to whatabout another’s is considered both ineffective and borders on conflict-seeking, inherently), that in their experience, they have seen the same the same whatabout tactics used to dismantle discussion when a “male centric” issue is the discussion catalyst, as when it’s a “female centric” issue originating the discourse.
I can’t speak for that other commenter to your follow up question though, so I’ll answer it for myself: I do not feel that whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men, no.
As a matter of fact, I feel that they’re employed more often to stiffle discussions on “woman centric” concerns precisely because of how little Men’s issues are discussed, and the reason for both is the same. That this is a side effect of the patriarchal systems in place doesn’t absolve either side from the requirement to be genuine if genuine discourse is sought, though.
I have seen what the commenter is mentioning and right here on Lemmy to boot. Because whether male or female, a whatabout is an easy rhetorical blanket to reach for, and many do.
I believe that both genders (including and specially men, who must own up to the fact that collectively we’re the gender with the greater frequency of offense against other genders if we’re ever going to get to addressing why it’s the same systemic patriarchal roots binding women’s rights that choke out the existence of men’s rights issues) have to be willing to communicate.
Women in aggregate are crying to be heard, but “TooManyMen” aren’t listening that they’re (women) speaking for them both too, and I feel those men who are able to hear some of that message need to help out in stopping the whataboutism wall in their brothers before they get going…
The same way that I believe there’s women who need to do the same for many of their sisters in the public square.
Divided is how we’ve gotten to this, unapologetically more viscerally dangerous for womanhood world that pretty much always has been, but I feel that it is united that we’ll reach any dreams of equity or widespread understanding between the genders, if we ever will.
In short, I agree “that that [whataboutism tainting discourse] is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender”, but the mere axiomatic observation falls short of the next step:
Both sides need to acknowledge and give each other the room to voice out their feelings, views, ideas, etc, genuinely (trolls and agitators need not be entertained) while still keeping an eye for the possibility that unity lies not in knowing the correct answer but in the shared questioning.
Fellas let’s do (and encourage our brothers to) better whether we think it’s fair or not, and ladies, understand (and share with the sisters who it’s safe to) that a hypocrite and someone whose barriers are breaking will appear briefly as the same before change is undergone.