Eh. If one wanted to do charity for the less fortunate, it might be better to just work for or give to bona fide charitable causes - rather than operating a marginal, possibly unprofitable Android app.
I own a Samsung S24 Ultra, by choice. Would not consider myself a charity case.
I got my first smartphone years and years ago, and it was an android. Then they came out with the iPhone 3GS, and I briefly had that. Didn't like it, traded for an Android. Was ready to experiment back then, even briefly ran Windows Phone flashed on a HTC device. But inertia had its way with me, and I've been sticking with Android ever since. I have all the apps I need. I have my ages-old "weird" workflows set up, like keepass synced through OneDrive. I run an andblocker on firefox. Moving to an iPhone would be just so much pain for no real gain.
If you don't provide an Android app, well, provide me with a burner iPhone if you want me to use your service.
What happens when your general approach (ignore the margins) means the "bona fide charitable causes" can't operate because they all require top-of-the-line equipment to even be functional?
Software is already shite, stop trying to justify making it more shite.
This is missing the point. Shouldn't software generally work well for the people who use it? Or are we really just saying out loud that we build software for our own enrichment and the users are just a means to that end?
Imagine $FOOTBALL_TEAM fans vs $OTHER_FOOTBALL_TEAM fans, except instead of their fervor being a minor factor setting the general mood in the arena, it’s the actual competition
I’m not sure how any program to recycle plastic bags (etc) is supposed to show 60% recycling-compliance without labeling instructing consumers to recycle the bags. Wouldn’t it just be simpler to ban the plastic?
It would also be simpler to just ban cigarettes and alcohol and all of those things that the State of California knows to cause cancer. Complete prohibition is not the only policy tool we have, and indeed it's usually a pretty bad tool.
Right now, recycling (at least, of plastic) is a lie. This law is about forcing companies to stop lying. Seems appropriate to me.
Glass containers were far more common when I was growing up. Manufacturers and retailers prefer plastic because it's cheaper to ship and has less breakage. At the consumer end of things, glass is a minor danger but I remember when sidewalks and parking lots used to frequently have glass shards. Nearby grassy areas ended up with them too. And if you dropped a glass jar at home, it was a challenge to find every little bit of glass that flew off across the floor.
Plastic has done away with many of the problems that glass containers created, though it has a ton of issues of its own.
The point was that they're _not_ kind enough when you buy through Alex. The instant coffee you bought last month could have doubled but if you say "Alexa add [the coffee] to my cart ot just work… and if my anexcodes extrapolate at all, LOTS people use this feature.
Don’t be ridiculous. Plea deals were created by prosecutors so they could eliminate the right to a jury trial by overcharging and making it far too risky to exercise.
I don’t look forward to taking them and choose other drivers, mostly because the price and wait time dynamics are a little funny, but I am glad I did take a ride or two. They’re much better drivers in the sense of “not interested in pushing any limits.” They navigated around a parked truck effectively, queueing and waiting their turn to go into the opposing lane behind some other cars. The perception display of surrounding people and cars was very comforting. My only moment of fear was a sudden stop because a wrong-way bicyclist had lurched out into traffic — that’d happen with any driver, unless we hit the guy. Yeah, I guess you can cone them, they’re that conservative of drivers.
It’s clear that they’re not the cars for me to worry about out there on a bike / on foot / etc.
I assume all regular customers will be paying a fare of $3.25 or less per ride on the reusable Opus card (fare purchased in a 10-ride pack). Essentially you’re paying for the chip with the very-occasional-commuter one-ride convenience fee.
How big a trend is that, though? Most companies are all too happy to do a capitalism and move office expenses into OpEx, to improve their return on capital by being a pure-play widget company instead of a hybrid widgets / real estate development and holding corporation.
Sure, there are some big sprawling HQs of the gigacorps who just can’t find enough space to rent otherwise, but that seems to be a minority of office employment to me?
The pundits say the economy is fine, and that the labor market is still really tight (but slackening gradually). They do note that economic sentiment is really, really bad, and it seems to be for non-economic reasons (residual inflation shock, mostly). Avoiding further inflation is the key reason that policy is leaning on the labor market at all.
There is a general consensus that real wages after accounting for the realities around things like health care have been flat or declined for coming up on 45 years.
It’s a quiet consensus, but few are claiming that Gen Z is just crushing it on home ownership or any other credible proxy for doing as well as the baby boomers.
Cheap consumer electronics are not substantially wealth! High-fructose corn syrup might be cheaper than ever, but anything north of that is rapidly becoming a boutique luxury. A public university education is triple what it was 20 years ago.
Hacker News is in many ways the best thing on the Internet, but people trying to finely parse this and that nitpick under a headline “Amazon Pays The Fines So They Can Continue to Exploit Workers with Impunity” makes me embarrassed to hang out here.
