I've had this happen to me twice in about 25 years. Neither bank made me wait weeks.

The most recent one (with a giant megabank) issued a provisional credit in under an hour.

There seem to be a lot of people in this thread who have never actually been through this and are just apeing what other people say online.

U.S. banks largely give debit cards the same protections as credit cards for at least the last 15 years.

Relatedly, the credit card system is truly a tragedy of the commons situation.

It's a ~2% drag on the economy for what? For some silly points with constrained value and an excuse to not build better financial infrastructure.

The frustrating thing is that, given the current equilibrium, you're a sucker for not using a credit card - you end up subsidising those who do.

So assuming the rest is all the same, you just paid exactly what you would've paid with a debit card. Because the merchant had to raise prices to accommodate the fee. And that's with the credit card company not taking a cut and we all know that's not true.

High tier cards are more expensive to accept, unless your merchant rate is a high enough flat rate that it covers the average and then some.

Yes we'll open a dispute. Yes we'll give you a credit immediately. But then we just take the sellers word for it that they're trying to make it right and charge you anyway.

This is my one singular experience with a dispute but that's with a big bank getting almost all of my transactions over the course of years....

Also, that means the person had the PIN too? That becomes harder to defend

  1. It's free
  2. A million plug-ins

> I don't use it because it's so dog slow.

You might find it runs better with fewer plugins.

I almost disable all extensions except the ones I use all the time. Then I enable specific ones at workspace level.

Yes, it's annoying. But as an extension author, I know how some badly written extension can significantly slow down the experience, both during startup and editing. I even profiled other people's extensions and submitted feedback.

I've done a lot of shell-driven development in the 00s though, and I remember it did involve frequently firing up vim instances for editing just a single file. I no longer understand the appeal of that approach. Navigating between files (using fuzzy search or go-to-definition) is just a lot faster and more convenient.

  > starting vscode again takes about a second, and then maybe 10s of seconds of background processing

I don't reboot often and I'm still lazy and will leave projects open often, but honestly, have you considered that your workflow is an adaptation to the wait time?

  > Navigating between files (using fuzzy search or go-to-definition) is just a lot faster and more convenient.

> Yet I'm doing the same thing instantly or near instantly.

Does vim somehow allow LSP servers to index faster? Or are you not actually doing the same thing?

Yes, Neovim supports LSP and it is very very fast.

I'm not sure why any of this is surprising. We're talking about the same company who is speeding up their file browser by loading it at boot time rather than actually trying to fix the actual fucking problems. Why is it surprising that everything else they make is slow and bloated as shit (even more as they've shoving AI into everything)

https://neovim.io/doc/user/lsp.html

Are you like, for real? How often do you load it up for it to matter in the slightest? Do you not just open the project once at the start of the day and then continue working?

Sorry but for someone used to working in VS proper and projects which take minimum 40 minutes to build, saying that a startup time of a few seconds is a problem is.....just hard to understand.

  > How often do you load it

I live in the terminal and opening files with vim is the primary way I interact with them.

  > Do you not just open the project once at the start of the day and then continue working?

  > projects which take minimum 40 minutes to build

Don't you have partial compiles? Parallel compiling? Upgrade your machine?

But it's not just startup time. I use less RAM, less CPU resources, jumping through tags is instant, working through the debugger is instant, opening new files is instant, fuzzy searching my system is instant. It sounds like the program you're working on and your editor are fighting for resources and I've never faced that problem with vim

We do. Without it it it takes over 3 hours for a full project build. Normally if I change one line of code and hit "run" it takes ~10-15 minutes for the app to start, depending on which file I changed.

>>Upgrade your machine?

It's a 64 core/128 thread core Threadripper workstation with 256GB of ram, so not many upgrade options from that.

It's a huge C++ project, heavily templated, that's kinda normal. My previous 2 projects were also like this.

And 5 min is very different from 40 mins. Don't pretend a factor of 8 isn't insignificant

I've also worked on systems which are entirely written with template metaprogramming. This is definitely not the norm. Though that code was highly focused on optimization, as we were writing for HPC environments (extremely heterogeneous hardware). Sure, a full compile could take quite some time but doing a full compile, or even compiling a decent portion, when developing would be insane. A partial compile of a few minutes usually meant my time was better spent mucking about with the cmake and build files because incremental testing sped up development and your PRs aren't going to be merged quickly if they take an hour to verify if they even compile.

I mean, last time I checked there are hundreds of thousands of programmers working in this industry, and video games are a bigger industry than movies. What's not the norm about it, exactly? I imagine there's more programmers out there making video games than making accounting software, for example.

>>And 5 min is very different from 40 mins. Don't pretend a factor of 8 isn't insignificant

I'm sorry, I'm confused. Did I ever imply otherwise? Maybe let me say it again, clearer - so far I worked at 2 big AAA studios, on 5 big AAA franchises, in 4 different engines. All 5 of those had those multi-hour compilation times unless you used something like Incredibuild or Fastbuild, and every single one of them had a startup of around 10+ minutes if you made any change to the code at all, just for VS to finish compilation and linking. I also worked at a small indie studio, with its own C++ engine, we had maybe...200 files max? That project took 5 minutes to build. Don't know where you got the idea that I'm saying factor of 8 is insignificant.

>> your PRs aren't going to be merged quickly if they take an hour to verify if they even compile.

Hmm at the current project the time from me submitting a change to it actually being accepted is ~6 hours. On my previous projects I think the fastest I've seen has been around an hour for a very very quick preflight. But then all the tests also have to pass which takes a lot of time.

>>ure, a full compile could take quite some time but doing a full compile, or even compiling a decent portion, when developing would be insane.

Right, but you have to do this at least once when you get latest, normally in the morning I grab latest and have to build around ~9000 files. If I make a change in the gameplay code it might have to recompile ~200-300 files because of the dependencies on all the associated systems.

- Charles Manson quoting NBC in Family Guy

A very analytical, technological, short-sighted view of things. But not necessarily how the customers think.

For many customers, a company that isn't growing is shrinking. If a company isn't willing to invest in growth, that's a red flag.

I mentioned the Vimeo thing in a meeting this morning, and the head of Communications immediately said he's going to start looking for alternatives.

You can make all the analogies and excuses you like, but look at Vimeo's sister properties (Evernote, etc.) Are they better off since they were gutted? Are they delivering more value to the customers, or just funneling money to the parent company and its investors?

I think a better analogy is some big Wall Street investment company buying up nursing homes, and making lots of noises about "efficiency." That never works out well for the patients/customers. Only for the company.

He's gonna start looking for alternatives and then most likely find nothing that matches the featureset vs price of the current solution + the cost of switching, and the matter will quickly disappear.

Last time AWS or Cloudflare was down a lot of noise was made and a lot of people started looking for alternatives too - and everyone forgot about it a week later.

> Only for the company.

Yes, the point of business is to make profit, not to be a charity. Bending Spoons believes they can extract enough profit off Vimeo to justify the purchase price, either by reducing expenses, raising prices or both. This may still be palatable to the customers if they don't have any better option.

No one said it was. Where do you see that in this thread?

Bending Spoons believes they can extract enough profit off Vimeo to justify the purchase price, either by reducing expenses, raising prices or both. This may still be palatable to the customers if they don't have any better option.

Just listen to yourself. "Extract enough profit," "raising prices," and ending with You don't like it, too bad. You sound like the taxi industry before Uber.

This the type of thinking that gave us Windows 11, Adobe, and every other piece of technology that started good, but became crap.

It's also the reason new companies suddenly show up and eat the incumbent's lunch. Happens every day.

I'm glad I don't work for you or your company. I have pride in my work. I wouldn't want to be just another tool to "extract" things from my customers because "they don't have any better option."

Fair enough, a minority of businesses are run as public benefit corporations. But the vast majority is ran to generate profit. Bending Spoons especially.

> I wouldn't want to be just another tool to "extract" things from my customers

I assume you're independently wealthy and acquired said wealth from a generous donor who gave it to you with no expectations in return?

Because otherwise we're all "extracting" something.

I take pride in my work too and I believe the prices I charge for my services are fair - but nevertheless if I gave the choice to my clients between paying me for those services or getting them for free, they'd prefer free.

> This the type of thinking that gave us Windows 11

What's giving us enshittification and the terrible quality of software nowadays is the lack of healthy competition, because of lacking anti-trust enforcement and adversarial interoperability being effectively illegal. Companies thus take their customers hostage and raise prices/decrease quality.

Ideally we'd just make competition in tech a reality again which would put a limit on enshittification.

I don't like the guy, so it's not like me to defend him, but perhaps because he's busy being the head of the Communications department, instead of a tech nerd?

My company produces thousands of pieces of communication each year in many different forms. Video is a small part of what his department does, so you make the false assumption that this is an "important piece" of his domain.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn he doesn't have some internal cronjob to constantly search for alternatives to every single one of the (probably hundreds) of vendors we have around the world.

It's very weird that you feel that you're in a position to second-guess a person you never met, in a job you've never done, in a company you don't know, in an industry you also don't know. That's Olympic-level hubris.

And now you're saying he might have a "cronjob" constantly searching for alternatives? Well then your original point is neutered, he's not going to "start" since he's already been looking.

And video is only a small part? Not an "important piece"? Well then why should Vimeo's owners manage their company based upon what low-level users think? Again, you've minimized the point of your original post to irrelevancy.

Ditto for Picasso, and many artists even going back to the Renaissance when great painters and sculptors sometimes had apprentices finish or duplicate paintings/sculptures for them.

But this isn't that. AI is something else entirely.

I don't recommend using the Warhol argument. It's become a trope used by AI-über-alles people who have little knowledge of and often zero experience in the arts.

The reason why artists are mad about AI is the same reason artists were mad about the photograph… they were selling a product like craftsmen, but calling themselves artists. Yes, there is a crisis for getting paid to be someone else’s creative, but there is no crisis in creativity. In fact, there has never been more freedom than now.

Duchamp's R Mutt is an abstract commentary.

The actual vehicle of this commentary, the upside down urinal, is wholly arbitrary.

I don't claim others misunderstand art. I'm saying that art as a product that can be sold for income, where people want to own it, is tied to thingness.

>The actual vehicle of this commentary, the upside down urinal, is wholly arbitrary.

Yes. I agree. I'm generally confused by what you're trying to say here. I also know there are a many copies of Fountain... which again, demonstrates the concept of thingness in art I'm trying to talk about.

You typically can't hang a performance art piece in a gallery all day. You certainly can't sell a print to people at home. The fact that they care about the original instead of holding equal value to the print is exactly what I'm talking about. Digital creations don't have the same thingness, because you'd literally need to do something like get the original RAM that rendered the piece to identify it as "the original."

Defining "concerns about AI" broadly as "is it art?" while obstinately denying the possibility for real concerns about imagegen tech: theft of intellectual property by the wealthy, environmental, economic, expressive, and on and on.

> I don't claim others misunderstand art.

> gp: I'd suggest people learn about ...

Is a passive aggressive way to say "you misunderstand this due to your ignorance".

> I also know there are a many copies of Fountain... which again, demonstrates the concept of thingness

> gp: Fucking Duchamp’s readymades should make any concern about AI worthless.

If anything this "demonstrates the thingness in consumerism".

My point was you are ex post facto conflating your opinion of the items in the gift shop with the named artist's own expression.

Whenever I see the word "influencer," my brain automatically substitutes "unemployed."

Reminds me of when everything was e-something. Then i-something. Then net-something. Then my-something. Then cyber-something.

You can tell the age of a tech product by which naming trend it attached to itself.

Related: HP Offers 'That Cloud Thing Everyone Is Talking About’

https://youtu.be/9ntPxdWAWq8

He was forced to a buy-out, kept as a VP, intentionally forced out, and accepted cash to settle their violation of terms.

My hackles rose when he made the name change, but... not my business. Sad to see how quickly my intuition was validated. Would his company have survived else? Dunno, of course. But hopping onto the fad wave was, in retrospect, far more dangerous than simply navigating with the assets he had.

Disabling and then re-enabling Javascript will cause my bank's web site to log you out, requiring full 2FA to log in again.