After seeing this video for the first time, I watched some of his others.
Seemed to be a pretty standard review channel until it hit me in the face:
His earliest videos review restaurants together with his wife. Then it transitions to reviewing bars, then only him sitting in front of his camera at home reviewing whisky. Until the iconic video of his wife leaving him.
Most of these vids were only watched by a couple people, and he reviewed a new bottle of whisky almost every day.
His Youtube channel documents his slow decline and slip into alcoholism. Dude must have drank several bottles of booze per week off camera, for years.
If you are serious about help, and you are still early in the process, just one less bottle per night every day for a week, then the next week one less than that.
It takes will power, but if you want it you can do it. It doesn’t have to be cold turkey. If you are at a six pack a night, or a 4 pack of some 12% ones you can wean yourself off nightly binge drinking in a month or two.
When you are down to one a night, switch it to one every other night… Then don’t buy any for a week. Then you can figure out how to drink more responsibility.
If you are to the point where you drink one when you wake up, you will need medical detox. If you wait… You will probably eventually die from alcohol related diseases.
Thanks for reaching out. I’m at 12-15 6-9%s every night. Once or twice a week I’ll drink one or two before I leave for work so that the worst of the hangover hits at home/ can be staved off with another beer once I get back. I truly appreciate your sentiment and want to use this to give me some momentum to quit. I know I’ll have the shakes and be super sweaty for a week, but I can work with that. I quit meth, alcohol and smoking before, I can kick beer again. I think part of the problem is it’s a lesser issue than the other stuff I quit so I let myself keep slipping. Again, thank you
Genuinely, I encourage you to see a doctor first- at that rate you have a good chance of serious alcohol withdrawal. It is more dangerous than heroin withdrawal and the symptoms can range from sweats and shakes up to seizure and death.
Quitting booze will improve your life immeasurably but you need to do it with the assistance of a doctor or GP, your life depends on it. I believe in you, mate.
…we have about two hundred opened single malt whiskies and it takes us years and years to finish any one bottle; two or three wee drams are usually plenty to review fairly, maybe twice if we want to come back another day for a second opinion…
But if you buy and try a new bottle every other day and don’t finish it, they will pile up over time and eventually go bad. The amount you buy must be equal to the amount you drink in the long term.
…whisky really doesn’t ever go bad as long as the bottle is sealed; we use teflon plumber’s tape around the neck for long-term storage but there are other solutions, too…
I used to buy for a liquor store. There are tons of whiskey people who open bottles but don’t finish them. He might be an alcoholic or he could be one of those guys. We don’t know why they broke up.
Even if he had only one drink every time, it’s still a form of alcoholism to do so every single day (as the previous commenter alluded to). It’ll still devolve into compulsive behavior.
If he has a single drink a day he’s not an alcoholic by most standards. It’s only in the trash DARE adjacent programs that nonsense like that is taught.
Agreed. I have about 20 open bottles of different whiskeys right now. I’ll probably have a glass or two each week.
You can have a very robust collection of whiskey and also drink in moderation. I know when I buy a new bottle I’m excited to try it, and the seal usually doesn’t last for longer than a day.
You can store whiskey for a very long time if the bottle is over halfway full. Keep them upright and away from the sun and they’ll last for many years and still hold their taste. You might lose some due to evaporation though.
It took a couple weeks but I’ve found that blocking some bot accounts and adjusting the sorting on the app I use has plenty of fresh content with active posts. It isn’t exactly the same as reddit in its prime, but I shouldn’t expect it to be either.
It’s causing me to branch out into other topics and conversations that I probably would’ve missed on a gigantic platform like reddit. I think reddit made it easy to see interesting content because of how long it had to develop into a community. Lemmy is still a bit jumbled and fragmented, but the community seems to be sticking around and forming a new identity apart from reddit.
If I did that I’d feel obligated to remove the user accounts I’ve blocked from my list before posting it and frankly that isn’t worth the time or the trouble since I’d have to manually recheck all the accounts to see why I blocked them. No thanks lol.
I think it’s pretty easy to replicate what I did with minimal effort though. All I really did was change the ‘all’ page in my Lemmy app (Boost) sorting to the newest posts. It becomes obvious pretty quickly when a couple communities have 4+ most recent posts, by the same accounts, etc. Most of the bots that exclusively repost reddit content are very obvious with just a couple clicks.
Once I had the worst offending reddit reposters blocked I noticed certain community/instance/users were either spamming content I’ll never care about or were NSFW bots, or were too region specific, etc. so I blocked them too. I spent a day or two doing more blocking than browsing.
After that I changed the sorting on the ‘all’ page to active posts, which at that point was mostly posts by real people again. From there I’ve only had to block the odd account here and there like I would on any other social platform. Every so often I’ll notice a bot post that’s slipped through but if the community is active someone else has usually posted something similar that’s getting more interaction anyways, so I don’t feel like I’m missing out on much I’d be interested in or the stories that are actually newsworthy.
Well, I still visit Reddit once a week since there are communities there that don’t yet exist here (or they are nearly empty).
I’m now all the time on Lemmy and am even much more active than what I ever was on Reddit, but I only have so much time.
I noticed there are slightly less quality posts in some subreddits, but I wouldn’t call Reddit crushed.
In fact, subscribers in all the subreddits I used to follow are actually up and even by a lot, while Lemmy users don’t really seem to increase by much (though I’d like them to).
I’d like to see a sudden growth in Lemmy and fall of Reddit, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near (though I’ll keep doing my part here!)
The comments on Reddit are way worse now, it’s extremely noticeable. Look at comments on /r/science for example. They’re all shitty jokes which used to get deleted.
The vast majority of subs are completely unmoderated now or taken over by a small group of people. Like /r/worldnews allowing people to openly support literal genocide of Arabs.
Reddit quality absolutely took a hit after this debacle.
not to mention the continued guarantee of enshittification. We’ve only just seen the beginning of their pursuit of short term profits at the expense of their core value: the userbase.
Reddit always had a problem with far right/anti science dogwhistlers, but it also seems like it’s gotten much worse. Maybe I was just desensitized and I’m noticing it more because I don’t go there much, or maybe it is actually worse because it’s an election year, but it also wouldn’t surprise me if the .01% of frequent commentors who left full-time for Lemmy represent a significant brain drain.
Ah, I hadn’t noticed this level of worsening. I suppose because when I visit I still go to niche subreddits and there the impact is less noticeable (but you do notice it).
I suppose great moderators have left the platform and they’ve been replaced by others who would like to be as good (but are crippled by new Reddit rules allowing many more trolls) or those that just don’t care or are straight crazy!
I just would like to see certain niche communities grow here too because Lemmy is great and (so far) it feels like the conversations here are nicer, so I’d like people to move here to make Lemmy even better
There’s nothing wrong with Lemmy growing in an organic sustainable way, but I dislike the attitude that lemmy ought to be a reddit replacement or that lemmy should grow from the ashes of reddit.
Lemmy should be it’s own thing with it’s own culture and history and communities.
I get a bit peeved when lemmy users (not necessarily you) get a bit obsessive about transferring communities to lemmy from reddit. Just focus on creating good content for Lemmy and forget about the rest.
The governments all around the world are probably in favor of it, because their big “donors” want it and it lowers costs for the judicial system for them. It’s a win-win from their perspective.
The real reason for arbitration is that it usually costs hundreds to initiate and the rules can be murky. In comparison most places in America you can file a small claims suit for $20 and are given help by the court/government.
It also creates no precedent. You lose, you pay out one angry customer, but the next one who tries, you get a fresh attempt to convince the arbitrators you were right.
In a real court, the first loss woukd be leveraged against you by everyone else in similar straits, even if it wasn’t a class action.
NAL and stare decisis is definitely not as strict in arbitration but arbitration generally has to follow state court rules or it will get invalidated including use of precedent. Most court decisions never get published anyway so its essentially the same loss.
I hadn’t considered small claims (though I’ve filed, and won, several small claims cases myself).
It would be great to teach people how to use the small-claims system - Imagine these companies having to deal with these courts in every state.
They’d probably default (not show up), and have judgements against them, then the complainant would be stuck trying to enforce the claim (it’s not automatic). In the end, Corp would see this as a win… Until it became a news story that “Corp X has hundreds of unresolved judgements”
I am sure everybody’s situation is different but luckily for me as a New York Resident, between long arm statues and the interconnectedness of banks/Wall st everybody has to pay or forfeit their bank access 🤣
This video kind of misses the mark on delivering the points of the title, but these are the simplest boiled down points of the community gripes:
ASUS is having quality control issues, or deliberately skimping to pad profits
They are rebranding lesser quality components with the higher quality ROG brand, and pricing it as such
They are unilaterally voiding warranties when users try to RMA or return said hardware
Gigabyte (remember them?) did this same slow slide of enshittification about 10 years ago. The issue pretty much boils down to a company producing too many different types of things, instead of staying good at the things they do well, and the community has noticed and is calling for boycotts. This will no doubt put them on the defensive for years to come, and affect their overall standing in the larger community until they correct course.
Sure do! Both my board and the board in my wife’s computer are Gigabyte. So’s my video card. The only issue I’ve ever had with their stuff has been a bad stick of ram a few years ago, which they exchanged without argument.
Brands in this sphere I definitely have had trouble with: MSI, Razer – so many problems with Razer – and ASUS.
I mean their mice are terrible too. I went through three of their mice in two years back in like 2016. Been using a Logitech g2 whatever their most famous one is since then and it’s not had a single problem. So much so that I bought two more for my other computer and my wife.
Keyboards, headphones, laptops, a handheld Steam Deck imitator, and various other RGB gamer shit. All of it is trash. Their business model nowadays seems to revolve entirely around upselling Aliexpress quality Chinese garbage at premium prices and then methodically denying every single warranty claim for defective and DOA product using spurious excuses. Oh, and their driver software is crap. And their products are consistently behind even Logitech on the features you get for the price.
Through no particular intentional means, I am now a Logitech convert. For mice and keyboards, their stuff has always been consistently reliable for me, their “G” series driver software is significantly less irritating than Razer Synapse, and most of their stuff is cheaper as well.
I think in my lifetime I’ve trashed four Razer keyboards, at least as many mice, and two pairs of headphones. All of these died early deaths – within weeks, sometimes a couple of months at the outside. Every time I tell myself this time will be different. It never is. I don’t buy their shit anymore, and I don’t recommend anyone else do, either.
I bought the $120 Razer Wolverine V2 Xbox controller after MS shrunk the official controller for the Series S/X and it was a piece of shit. Replaced it with a $45 gamesir (Chinese brand) with hall effect triggers and sticks that I’ve had for two years now with no issues and no drift, a first for any xbox controller I’ve ever had. Razer sucks.
I keep hearing this and wonder if I should buy bulk mice before they come preinstalled with malware or something because they last decades so voting with your wallet doesn't really work.
Maybe. Or just switch to whatever the good mouse brand is at the time. I’m rocking a Microsoft Intellimouse Pro (wired) on my desktop, which I really like. On my work laptop, I have a Logitech MX Master 3 at work (had lots of issues with the thumb button in the past), and a Logitech Triathlon (no issues).
My wife had a couple of the g305s die on her within a year, so I switched her to a Razer Deathaddr Mini, which has been good for over a year now.
Yeah so the thing with PC parts suppliers is that every brand is going to have people who have experienced problems with their stuff.
Gigabyte I’ve never had a problem with, but yeah during the pandemic their power supplies were fucking exploding so yeah that’s a problem.
Asus I’ve never had a problem with, but yeah their boards on both sides have been setting voltages and power limits very aggressively, killing AM5 CPUs catastrophically, potentially causing instability on higher end Intel chips as well it seems. That’s a problem.
Anecdotal like the rest of the posts here, but I recently built a new rig for gaming/lab testing and used a Gigabyte board for the first time in a decade after seeing good reviews and a solid sale price.
About 3 weeks after setting everything up it just crapped out. Would reboot seconds after you pressed power. Checked and verified absolutely every other part, no luck. Tried to contact support, got the runaround for a few days until I was directed to a site to submit an RMA request.
That was a month ago, zero movement still. About 4 days into it I bought an identical part of Amazon and “traded” em. I’m usually pretty ethical about that kind of thing but this was ridiculous and I needed the PC working ASAP.
Who’s decent anymore? I always used to go with MSI.
I have a 14 year old gigabyte motherboard in my older computer. When I first got it I didn’t know what I was doing and plugged the wrong thing in somewhere and blew up a component on it. As long as I don’t use that slot it chugs along just fine. I wish companies would just keep making things that last I’d gladly pay a fairly steep premium for that. Instead it seems every company that gets known for making good stuff decides to shit all over themselves
Honestly, in your case, it could just be more about who makes what components can withstand X amount of punishment and keep the electrons flowing through so other things keep working 😂
Agreed on your point though. Cheap shit needs to stop.
No. The ROG brand is ASUS’s brand in the first place.
Like, anyone could be like “this is my normal quiche, and this one here is my MuMu quiche.”
Then, once everybody’s buying MuMu, start using the normal recipe for MuMu. It’s not illegal, but at first people think they just got an Ok MuMu, then they start realizing it just sucks now. Hard for the company to recover from that.
Hahaha thanks for this. I really find it fascinating how bad CEOs make lemmy think all companies are bad. It makes no sense.
Blame the system maybe, I get that. But good grief we are all trying to make a living. The only way to do it is to do business. Like any system, it will be exploited, but I’m not gonna shit on private companies especially who clearly have a vision and don’t need investor snobs to drive them to commit evil.
It’s not their own opinion, they’re just repeating what they learned online. There’s multiple valve devs being “exploited” for $250k a year, it’s really tragic. They even exploit their worker by having college classes on the top of their building for their employees.
I meant it the other way around. No matter how benevolent a dictatorship is, eventually the dictator will change and you better hope there will be another benevolent one.
I personally don’t think the problem is doing business. I think the problem is businesses not being democratic.
Which stockholders? Valve does have some, but it doesn’t appear that they are published and are probably mostly employees since it’s not publicly traded. Maybe you’re saying that like game publisher stockholders from EA and such are involved in decision making at Valve? That seems plausible but it doesn’t seem like they’d have a ton of power over operations, more just some negotiating power.
Private companies still have shareholders who they are bound to make profit for. They’re just shareholders not fixated on stock value as it’s not publicly traded.
Private companies aren’t bound to make profit. I purposefully tanked my companies profit to literally 0 during the pandemic so I could keep my employee on at full wage while only open half time. A private company can make profit for shareholders, but it doesn’t have to. It can do whatever the shareholders want it to do, within the boundaries of the law.
Valve gud. EA bad. Why Valve gud? Because me am told Valve gud. Why EA bad? Because me an told EA bad. Fact that each is purely motivated by profit and that my sentiment is almost entirely a byproduct of effective Valve PR coupled with it being the defacto gaming marketplace for 20 years and that the only value I have to it is as a data point in a spreadsheet is lost on me.
Valve’s strategy is to maintain dominance of their software platform, Steam.
It has been pushing Linux as a viable computer platform as a counter to if/when Microsoft wanted to monetize PC gaming in direct competition to Steam, which seems to be a wise decision.
Valve is not forcing us to run steam. It can’t do that. What it can do is offer a very good product which makes us use it. If in the future, valve starts doing shitty things with steam, most of the community will just move on.
Also what the hell do you mean by consumer linux is steam¿?
Valve runs the DRM that runs Steam. They are making the platform desktop agnostic, but that may not be sustainable.
Also what the hell do you mean by consumer linux is steam¿?
After the release of the Steam Deck, Linux on Steam has seen an increase so large that it now beats Apple for the #2. Steam may push users to Linux, but still run the Steam walled garden.
Valve runs the DRM that runs Steam. They are making the platform desktop agnostic, but that may not be sustainable.
Sure, but they can’t force Linux users to use Steam. It just so happens that most Linux gamers use Steam because it works well for them, thanks to the hard work of the various open-source devs (along with Valve, Codeweavers, etc) behind WINE, DXVK, and Proton. Microsoft can theoretically force Windows users to use only their store, if they felt like that was a good idea for whatever reason.
Steam may push users to Linux, but still run the Steam walled garden.
The Steam Deck has both a Desktop Mode which lets you run any application you want (so long as its Linux compatible of course), SteamOS is built on top of Arch (which you can build on top of), and lets you run whatever OS you would like (you can even go as far as removing SteamOS if that is what you want). I’m not sure how it’s a “Walled Garden”. A walled garden would be the Xbox / PlayStation / Switch and basically any other console, along with most mobile phones, where you cannot install the OS that you want - you’re forced to use what the manufacturer provides.
There’s a huge difference between GPS which is effectively a rootkit, and Steam which is a userland application however. To actually remove GPS requires that you have a device with an unlockable bootloader (or an active exploit to gain root privileges) so that you can flash a ROM without it - Steam is one simple uninstall away.
Sure, a monopoly on the gaming market isn’t great, and while I hope I don’t bite my words anytime soon - Valve/Steam is the lesser of the two evils. Especially if you consider that it wasn’t really all that long ago where Linux gaming was an absolutely crazy idea that resulted in the pool of games available to you to be very very small.
There’s a huge difference between GPS which is effectively a rootkit, and Steam which is a userland application however.
For now. But also, phone companies can use Android without GPS, but they have to rebuild a lot of functionally to get it to work, and this was done as a design decision by Google to maintain control over Android. I can easily see Valve doing this in the future. Hell, imagine Valve buying Unity and integrating it to Steam while keeping developer costs low.
Right now Valve could disappear and gaming on Linux would continue, better for the efforts Valve have already made. I would think that the improvements would stagnate without Valve, though.
Non-Steam utilities like Lutris, Bottles and Heroic run games nearly as well as Steam. We’d carry on.
Most of the linux world is not for “consumers”, it’s for “participants” also refered to as “the linux community”. Android and SteamOS are consumer oriented indeed, you buy your device that ships with a Linux-based OS. But on the PC side of things, you just get, install and use linux for free with no strings attached. Just by doing so you become a participant of the linux community, and you contribute to shape the future of Linux as an OS by choosing a distro over another, by choosing a DE, by reporting bugs, etc.
Any company that has influence on the development of Linux, can only have it by contributing to the whole project. This is what Valve is doing, as well as Intel, Canonical, Redhat and even Microsoft.
It’s going to depend. Are you using the Android version that can shipped with your device, or a custom ROM? are you using F-droid? have you ever reported a bug to an app developer ? I assume a big majority of Android users are consumers and not participants, but at least with Android you have options to participate. Nothing wrong with being a consumer BTW.
However, Android is quite a bit different from what is broadly understood as Linux. Yes, Android uses the Linux kernel, but appart from that it’s not a very open eco-system and Google absolutely controls the AOSP.
However, Android is quite a bit different from what is broadly understood as Linux.
I would argue that the difference has a lot to do with whether the user is typically a consumer or participant. Valve seems to be making a a form of Linux for consumers, even if participants can use the system.
After all, why buy the Steam Deck to delete Steam from it?
Also, when a mummy user and a daddy user love each other very much, they go into a special private online matchmaking lobby and make little baby users.
Not just money, they’re motivated by a long-term success. A lot of these companies can’t see past this quarter’s profits and bring a lot of Goodwill trying to make the numbers go up forever.
I think the the main reason is that they’re private with no intention to go public. They’re not beholden to random shareholders who know nothing about games and just want infinite growth, their decisions are actually made by people inside the company.
I played a lot of Sierra games in the 80s. I grew away from computers for a while and at some point in the 90s, Sierra sold out. They were basically drug through the mud, canned all its devs and became a brand rather than a software company. Sierra was also the first publisher of Half Life.
I was reading the history of Sierra there other night on Wikipedia and was sad because so many great games came out of that company and most were memorable. Hard to see that in any gaming these days
Back to my point, I started thinking that Valve saw what happened to Sierra and Newell decided fairly early on that they would be a software company and publisher and not sell out to a third party or take the company into the market. Pure speculation on my part, but they got their start sort of at the end of life of a bunch of 80s software companies. EA is certainly a shadow of what it was but it’s still around at least as a brand.
On the flip side, he was using up millions and millions of company dollars on his singleminded pursuit with no obvious results to show for it. Had things gone even a little differently, things would've gone very differently indeed. Hard to imagine most companies tolerating an employee flat ignoring instruction to change to another task when their old task was proving fruitless.
Hindsight is clear enough here, but in context it was pretty nuts what the guy was doing.
Makes you wonder how many great inventors of revolutionary tech were shoved off their path by dumb luck.
Probably far fewer than never had the opportunity to realize they could be great in the first place.
If greatness is one in a billion we have 8 (boy would the richest like us to believe that!). If it’s one in 100 million (I’m bad at math. I think it’s like) 80. Or if it’s one in a million, that’s 350 in the US alone. I’m inclined to lean toward the later, after all, if there aren’t a lot of greats waiting to be called up, how the fuck did we beat the odds by such a large margin??
It’s an extreme example that perfectly illustrates how profit is extracted from employees by the employers. He didn’t have any leverage to get a larger share of the profit from his labor, as is the case with most employees. You could call it toxic behavior, and it is, but it’s the expected behavior, the behavior incentivised by the system.
Sensible employers would go, holy shit, this guy delivered a moonshot and wants to keep going. Maybe let’s give him a teensy fraction of the money he made us, to encourage more of that from him and others.
That too is capitalism. That would be plain self-interested greed, and also reward the guy who did all the work. It was stupid business to spend millions of dollars to not employ that guy.
The real issue is that when someone in power is a complete idiot asshole, there’s fuck-all people can do to fix that. That systemic issue is honestly more of a problem than the money itself or the power itself.
Again: this was a bad decision, even from the perspective of raw greed. Paying the guy enough to keep him at the company is also capitalism. So it’s not useful or relevant to just say ‘that’s capitalism’ when a business makes a fucking stupid decision that loses them money.
It also shows how capitalism hinder innovation. It doesn’t create it. The potentially innovative path took money without any guarantee of creating profit. It’s bad business to be innovative. Capitalism prioritizing profit never chooses the best path, even if it gets a good ending eventually despite itself.
I’m not sure how you come to this conclusion. For every example of a capitalist avoiding risky investments, there are 100 capitalists betting on the next innovation.
Venture capital. Heard the term? AI, Metaverse, crypto, web 2.0, .com… The tech space alone is full of capital making (stupidly risky) bets. They also make good bets too, like PC, search engines, online shopping (oh, look how the tech giants came to be).
I get it, capitalism bad. But this is just a nonsensical argument.
The ratio might not be 1:100. It might not even be tilted towards the risk takers. Also some if not most of the examples you mentioned are based research done in universities and defence agencies. That research is typically a much riskier endeavor. That’s why the private sector doesn’t even attempt it and only shows up to productize or build upon that research once the risk for not turning profit is minimized.
Sure, it happens sometimes. However, the goal is never innovation for the sake if innovation. It’s innovations to create profit. The idea is you invest into one of these ideas that then creates a monopoly that can practice anti-completive behaviors to create more profit.
For example of something better, look at research universities. They are normally outside of capitalism and create innovation primarily for the goal of advancing knowledge of a subject or to solve some issue. It’s rarely purely for profit to sit on the thing after it’s created and ensure no one else can use it.
This is something that’s often poorly understood. There’s no profit in a perfectly competitive market. That is, according to orthodox economic theory, the most efficient market conditions are the ones where no participants make profit. From that you can derive what you said - that innovation is sought for moving a business away from perfect competition by gaining competitive advantage, which is anticompetitive! 😆
I was working for a place that was the market leader in a certain niche of simulation software. Their simulation was about 10x more efficient than their competitors. However, that version of the software is strictly off limits for the public, and made a version which they sold with a sleep statement so that it was only 1.1x faster than the next best solution. That way they could remain market leaders any time the competitors released a better version. Even though many systems rely on growing simulations to simulate bigger scenarios that could help save lives.
Specifically free (libre) licences, as permissive licences allow corporations to improve/adapt the software without contributing back to the community.
I only work on software with GPL compatible licences now.
Yeah, I guess the original statement was too broad, but any FOSS using a GPL license effectively is. I guess not anti-capitalist though, but un-capitalist. It doesn’t try to remove capitalism, it tries to be seperate from it.
Capitalists are motivated to innovate if there’s undistorted competition. If they don’t they will lose new markets. For exemple Microsoft and IBM failed to build the start of general public web search and Google won. More recently, Google failed the race to release the first general public LLM, OpenAI backed by Microsoft did.
There are probably as many examples of this as there are of companies ruining innovation for stupid reasons.
Though, what better system that a regulated “free” market do we have successfully tested? A bunch of political leaders deciding alone of what the companies should do? How does that prevent irrational decision that stops innovation? How do you prevent them from just doing whatever benefits them as seen in many authoritarian regimes that were supposedly socialist?
It’s a capitalist company that funded him to go to Florida and bought him the machine to do his work.
Where do you think he would get the 3 million the company gave him? It’s the company that spent that money to bet on innovation and they got a return on investment
Capitalism never chooses the best path, but neither does any other system. We haven’t invented a perfect system, and it’s probably impossible. Sounds like a strange critique since we’ll never reach perfection
Yeah where he went to a university not a capitalist company to learn. Then persisted in his research despite the capitalist company wanting to shut him down for not being profitable, then that company specifically and consciously screwed him over and didn’t reward him for it. Then tries to screw him over once again when he got a different job because of it.
The CEO of the time who actively went against the conventional wisdom of capitalism to fund a person he had know for decades and personally knew how capable he was.
Then as soon as that CEO left the personal connection was gone and typical capitalist mentality took over and tried to shut it down
Just like almost every big discovery this happened in spite of capitalism, not because of it.
That could happen in socialism, where a government grant runs out and research is no longer funded because the person in charge of funding science changes.
Socialism isn’t “when the government does stuff” it’s better thought of as when companies become democratised, so while it could still happen you have more chance to appeal to average people rather then purely answering to the CEO chasing profit margins.
Capitalism never chooses the best path, but neither does any other system. We haven’t invented a perfect system, and it’s probably impossible. Sounds like a strange critique since we’ll never reach perfection
Just because nothing is perfect doesn’t mean we can’t call out stuff for not being it. Sounds like a strange critique since we’re supposed to improve on things.
You’re right that nothing is perfect. How does that make critique invalid though?
Capitalism prioritizes profit. That’s it. We can imagine systems that prioritize any number of things; public welfare, innovation, creativity, equality, etc. Nothing will be perfect, but I’d say any goal is better than the selfish goal of profit seeking. Do you disagree?
Where do you think he would get the 3 million the company gave him?
As the story describes, it was the founder who was acting emotionally that funded him. It was no different than a noble patronage of someone like DaVinci in medieval times. When the capitalist son in law took over, he was cut off. It was only Japanese culture from Japan’s pre-capitalist era that saved his job.
The founder was acting in the company’s interest, that’s why you fund research.
He was actually not cut off either, he wasn’t fired when he continued his research despite being told not to. He still received a salary and was able to use the equipment purchased with company funds
Most common middle- and upper-tier phones, as well as any Pixel and Fairphone (thanks to being more open) will get a custom ROM with updates 8+ years after the release, and you can buy a used 5-year-old phone quite cheaply.
Typing this on my 10-year-old Sony Xperia Z with Android 13. It cost me $0 (found in e-waste) including a data plan (owner forgot SIM inside). The camera has low sensitivity and dust in it and the battery is worn, but everything else is decent. I will open it some day to fix the problems, a replacement battery cost me $10. There is even 4G and NFC, and the 1080x1920 screen is nearly “retina-density” at such small size. I decided to not use the SIM as it could be criminal, and I have my prepaid one in s dumb phone, but I use it for entertainment - the phone fits in my hand and the design is quite timeless. The CPU is a little weak, it cannot decode 1080p30 or 720p60 video in real time, and gets hot quickly on demanding websites.
Most people aren’t comfortable with flashing unofficial ROMs onto garbage bin phones. I’m unironically glad that you have rescued a perfectly good phone but that’s just not a scalable solution IMO. Buying a used phone that you know has a lineage ROM is a more viable path but you’re still back to square one if the battery or port or screen give up on you.
Yes of course. The point of this phone is to trade cost/perf/etc for improved repairability and business ethics. Long software support is a prerequisite for repairability being useful.
This phone isn’t for people looking primarily for best value.
All Samsungs - Note 4, Note 8 (had two), S20 FE (current). Always says the media was not safely removed (SD) and requires a restart, or outright refuses to recognize there is even a SIM card until I restart.
I think Framework and Fairphone are solving similar but different problems.
Fairphone is “keep this phone as configured working.”
Framework is more “I have this laptop but it can become this other newer laptop without me needing to buy all the parts again AND I can buy replacement parts.”
It’s really not even remotely the same calculus in my book.
You’re making a lot of good points here, but I feel like this last bit goes against how most people would evaluate purchasing such a phone after the fact.
For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse. It’s marketed at the niche segment of people who are willing to spend extra for a mid-tier phone to get more environmentally and socially conscious hardware. (…) Most people will be incredibly unhappy with a Fairphone 5 if the alternative would’ve been a Pixel 8.
People don’t walk around comparing what they have to what they don’t have based on specifications alone (that’s just successful marketing). Their actual experiences are what matters. The FP is a good enough phone that most people will experience no issues having one. Most people simply don’t need the best of the best, and whether it’s a FP or a Pixel doing what they need their phones to do is of very little consequence to them.
Don’t get me wrong. If you’re price oriented, and you want to get the most bang for the buck, there’s better options. But I would argue that this doesn’t matter all that much for most people’s satisfaction, which is probably much more by affected long support and repairability (even if it’s just that you can swap the battery).
Most average phone users don't give a shit about bezels, weight and stuff, they just buy whatever is put in front of them. If Apple came out with a new iPhone that was heavier, thicker bezelled, slower, people would still buy it because the truth is, they don't compare anything or look into it besides "this is the latest".
Speed is such a none issue, all mid-range phones are plenty fast enough for the very large majority of people. Buying flagship phones with the fastest SoCs is pointless to them, they will never get value from it - they just buy them because they are the latest "best shit you need" and they cost a lot more than a Fairphone.
Now the value of replacing a battery on the fly (whether broken or just for more juice) would actually be a lot higher, people used to do that in the past. The ability to repair the phone yourself wouldn't really matter to most, as they usually just take their phones to a repair shop anyway, but the cost of the repair would be lower.
The Fairphone has a great mission, one that all phones should be going after. They are expensive for what you are getting in terms of specifications, yes, but the company isn't large enough to make them any cheaper without sacrificing the point of them in the first place. It's fine to not want one, but comparing them to flagship phones, the same way you would compare an S24 to an iPhone 15, is actually unfair. Not to say you can't critise it, I think the software is the weak point and some issues were clearly highlighted, not unfixable though.
If price wasn't a factor and you just handed them to average people to use, then they would most likely be satisfied and would find value in it.
I think their point about framework laptops is actually a stupid one. The fairphone is not a modular device (although they always seem to be trying to claim that), which the framework laptops are. The fact you have to remove the battery to do anything kind of proves that it’s not modular, we’ve seen modular phones so we know what they look like and they don’t look like this.
So it just seems a weird comparison to have made. The fairphone is easier to repair than your average smartphone, but it’s still a lot less repairable than phones from the early 2000s. It’s not a simple repair unless you’re talking about a battery replacement. It doesn’t have swappable buttons, It doesn’t have swappable chassis. Basically it’s a cheap Android phone that costs more money than it is really worth with the justification of environmentalism. I would take a truly modular and easy to repair phone over this any day of the week if one existed, and since one doesn’t yeah I think i’ll go for a Pixel.
I’m not going to get into it because it’s really not relevant to the point, but it is absolutely not proven that modular phones are non-viable. The only two phones to ever tryid it basically never even were given a chance by their manufacturers before they were killed. They just realized that they would never make lots of money on it because you make more money by selling a new phone, then you ever will by just making modular components.
The original framework didn’t have motherboard upgrades, those came later. It was lauded for its openness and repairability
The original framework came with the claim that it WOULD have motherboard upgrades though (and then they delivered). It was only highly praised for what it was at the time because that’s what the product was (on top of being a product with pretty good specs) and you should never buy a product on the promise of something else.
Unfortunately, the modular phones died, because the few phones that did offer modules completely failed. It’s just not viable to create a fully modular device in this form factor.
I mean lots of people said that about laptops too and then Framework shook things up.
but other phones have sliders or slots that will let you live swap either card without even taking the back off
Modern phones on purpose dropped SD card support but yeah, slimmer phones still have those sliders. To be fair you need a tool for that, unlike their option.
especially for a company that small
We really have to keep that in mind. When they planned the FP5 they likely had no idea Google would do the same. They take what Qualcomm offers, unlike tech Giants Google and Samsung that can basically dictate update lifespans.
relatively spotty history when it comes to patching
They are the ODM unlike GrapheneOS and comparing them to Google is really unfair. Google makes Android, so they know the code best. They patch very quickly, the updates work for their phones out of the box, less work for GrapheneOS.
Fairphone on the other hand has to maintain a unique device which is way more work, they get early access because of that though.
And their noncompliance with all the GrapheneOS security demands is the reason I dont use it.
seems to take issue with seem to be the LineageOS/Android defaults
Fairphone is Google certified and thus needs to ship unmodified Android including all the Google crap. There is a company called Murena that creates some hacky LineageOS-based OS and sells Fairphones with it preinstalled.
This /e/OS looks nice and has very nice integrations, but is fundamentally flawed and less secure than GrapheneOS for example (microG, depending on unmaintained apps, even slower updates,…)
even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone.
Regular phones dont get 8 years of updates so they will be outdated and should not be used. This argument makes no sense.
I got a used Pixel 6a with 2 years left, so used but way less long updates, so I hope on getting a used Pixel 8 which means roughly 1,7 phones instead of one, should be equally sustainable.
but half the battery life in video decode means charging your phone twice as often even if you don’t watch Youtube all day
Most of the power goes into the screen. The Pixel 8 has a ridiculously power efficient screen. I have one. It also costs $300 to replace. The Fairphone’s is $100.
other phones have sliders or slots that will let you live swap either card without even taking the back off
Slots and sliders inevitably weaken the phone frame making it easier to break. They also cost more to machine.
even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone.
Replacing a battery to rescue a Pixel will run you $100-200.
Many design choices make a lot of sense when looked through the repairability, durability and cost of repairability lenses.
For a customer who wants the best phone for their money, the Fairphone is objectively worse
Objectivity worse in performance, sure. Some people consider more things than just being a fastest bang for the buck. Unethical mining, forced labour, e-waste, data mining, and lots of other things. If you care at all, that is.
If you want to compare that to a product made by a billion dollar company, no one is stopping anyone. There is cost associated with doing things ethically. Small companies aren’t financed to eat those costs to gain the market. It speaks more about principles than anything else.
I don’t disagree with Linus’ suggestion at the end: even the fairest phone is environmentally costlier than rescuing an old second hand phone
is it? The person who sold the phone is most definitely going to buy a new phone and if they sold the phone released last year they will most likely do so every year. The reason there’s a second hand market with a year old phones is because people obsessively buy new phones. How exactly is that environmentally friendly than starting to use a phone made by a company with higher ethics? Surely the later stacks higher in being environmentally and morally friendly?
Duchebag is spouting capitalists “trickle down” economics. Rather than fix the cause, find the flex tape to hide it. Rich people buy new phones, less rich buy phones from the rich, and so on. No one needs to look past the marketing into ethics in how they were made and companies keep profiting in billions by exploitation of the poor. So so environmentally friendly.
How exactly is that environmentally friendly than starting to use a phone made by a company with higher ethics? Surely the later stacks higher in being environmentally and morally friendly?
The difference is you can produce only the best phones. There aren’t throw away/cheap phones. The only difference is then how old the phone is.
It’s the difference between buying an old Lexus and a new base model Kia. They both might cost the same, and yeah the Lexus driver almost definitely got a new car, but the Lexus is probably going to outlive the Kia.
People are going to buy new phones regardless. You not buying used phones is not going to change that.
Buying used or refurbished keeps the devices they‘d throw away (or keep in a drawer for 10 years, then throw away), if they couldn’t sell them, from landfills.
Also, I know plenty of people who are well off that buy second hand phones and even more people who couldn’t even afford a Fairphone (which starts at almost 500€ for a 4 and 650€ for a 5) that buy a brand new 200-300€ phone every two years.
And those low end phones are the least environmentally friendly because they‘re definitely unethically made they most likely break more quickly than higher end options, they usually don’t get updates for very long, if at all, and there’s no noteworthy second hand market for them because people just throw them away (or into a drawer) if the phone stops working or when they feel like getting a new one, because who buys a 2 year old low end phone second hand?
Buying used instead is a great option. You get a higher end device for cheaper without anything new having to be made for you. It‘ll still last you years and you’ll have a better experience than with a cheap new phone.
Yes, it would be better if all phones were ethically produced, easy to repair and would last a long time. Especially if there are ethically phones in the sub 300€ market. Won’t be easy to achieve, if at all, and wouldn’t stop blind consumerism but it would make for an even better second hand market. Because, you know what’s better than a fairphone? A second hand fairphone.
That’s the stupidest argument against 2nd hand market I’ve ever heard. It read as you’re too proud and too much nose on your imagined status to buy “used shit”
Just too much power for one person. Even if they’re not in charge of a global internet provider, your average billionaire can singlehandedly affect the lives of millions of people (employees, customers, bystanders) with no democratic oversight at all. It’s just not something that should exist.
Meanwhile, until he was supporting USA and Ukraine, he was the good white hero for your ilk.
Yeah, because of that. This isn’t the gotcha you think it is, you aren’t uncovering a double standard. People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
No I didn’t, I didn’t ignore anyone. I am answering your statement. We are talking in the context of whom was considering him a “good white hero”. As per your statement:
he was the good white hero for your ilk.
I’m not going to specify the whole context of the conversation when it’s clear whom I’m talking about. You established the group of people that worshipped him in your original comment, I explained why.
People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
Oh you did ignore over 6 billion people that condemn Ukraine’s Nazism issues on the UN voting, and their support for Russia. Anglosphere consists of merely ~12% of the world’s population, and their Russia bashing undemocratic stance is NOT representative of what the whole world thinks. What white people think or say is not that important.
You seem to not understand how context in a conversation works. Look, The original comment said the following in a post about how Elon is acting agaisnt US interest:
This is why billionaires shouldn’t exist they are treasonous
So they are probably american. Then you answered them with:
he was the good white hero for your ilk.
Then I said the following, to you, after your comment:
People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
In this context, “People” can mean everybody, yes, but can also mean the subset of people we are talking about already, which I obviously was mentioning. I don’t really get why you are being so confrontational because I didn’t include the opinion of everybody in the world when trying to explain why americans or the west now think that Elon is a traitor.
Let me give you an example in good faith. When there’s a meeting between neighbours, they vote on X, and the president of the community states “The people have talked”, are they also ignoring the other 8 billion people that exist in the world? No, because it’s obvious that “pople” in that context refers to the subset of people only referring to the neighbours.
I really can’t explain to you more how context works, if you are that hellbent in chastisizing me for explaining to you why “those people” think like that in general, we have nothing more to talk about.
It has to. You generalised that all people hate Russia and love Ukraine. A lot of the world is NOT what you imply to be the whole world, and is a mere 10-15% of the world’s population. Rest of the world fears the Nazi disease brewing in Ukraine, having the potential to travel around to Asia and Middle East. We do not want America-funded Mujahideen clones. Russia is helping us.
If your definition of Nazism is “invading”, then USA seems to be correctly the biggest Reich empire on earth. Good, coherent logic! Maybe we can agree on something.
Russia is historically and culturally the most anti-Nazi country in the world, and by law, Nazism is fully outlawed there, unlike Ukraine, where Stepan Bandera is worshipped and there are monuments for these Nazis. forward.com/…/nazi-collaborator-monuments-in-ukra… Can you show me shit like this in Russia?
Oh, wait, I am not done with you just yet. For people like you…
Wait, and how exactly are any Ukrainians on Russian territory in order to paint blood swastikas on their women after killing them? They are defending their country, meaning they stay mainly in their country. Most haven’t had set foot in Russia since the start of the war. So what are the Russian women doing in Ukraine?
You know, this sounds a lot like Russian propaganda trying to make Ukrainians seem like fascists while they are not the ones invading sovereign nations.
Their leader is a Jew, you know that right?
So even if what you say were true, do you think it would have happened if Russia didn’t illegally invade a sovereign nation?
Do you know the demographics of DPR and LPR, which is eastern Ukraine? They are full of ethnic Russians, the very people that Ukrainian Nazis have been oppressing and murdering since 2014. Ukraine was part of USSR, in case someone as illiterate as you did not know. You know, Russia was many countries before, so there are many Russians around the country of Russia. I know, hard to understand.
Last I heard, Zelensky is a Zionist. Zionists are not the same as Jews. I think you support Israel and Nazism, which may be a perfect combination for your western ideology. You are parroting pro NATO bullshit with nothing backing it up.
Edit: nevermind, that bullshit map you shared in other comment means you specifically came to hunt my comment history to reply me, and to spread pro NATO propaganda. Go to reddit.
Tankie’s gonna tankie. This guy thinks he’s uncovered some ultimate hypocrisy which justifies Russia’s invasion. Like, America has neo-Nazi’s, therefore, it’s totally chill for Russia to use boxcutters to emasculate POWs (war crime), or execute civilians (war crime), or rape (war crime) civilians, or deport Ukrainian children to Russia (war crime).
Here in the rest of the world we fear the brewing nazi diseases, and how Russia is already a country that is fully infected, whatever they bullshit on paper about nazis.
Wow doubling down are ya? So I take it your levels of humour and intelligence got so much praise at Parler/Coat/Truth Social/whatever so you thought to try your luck here. Lil’ trolling the lefties. Everyone sees through it.
I saw 95 and not 141 countries for some reason, with India and China abstaining from vote as well. I wonder why is that the case.
I also wonder why, until the above document you shared, this used to be the voting norm for the past 20 years (until 2022), and why only 2 Nazi countries used to oppose the vote:
Billionaires are treasonous because they live outside the laws of their country, hold power over the government there and gain their money through exploitation
Were you opposing Musk and billionaires since forever, or are you one of the fresh new liberal “converts” that hate Musk just because he shat upon the toilet of the town square?
I am usually skeptical of people calling out on posts with such polarised headlines and hypocritical standard. My bad, perhaps you are not one of those people.
“Patriotic socialist”, someone who claims to be a champion of the working class, but is actually more of nationalist. They only care about the working class of a certain nationality or racial group, and are generally bigoted in their view towards marginalized groups. Real socialists are internationalist. You wanting to get rid of Musk, because he’s not sufficiently gung-ho about a war fought between capitalists on the back of workers, implies you consider the national interest more important than the lives of workers. This is anti-worker class collaborator shit, which is what patsocs are really.
What the fuck are you even talking about? Russia is throwing thousands of „working class“ lives away, since it wants to expand its territory in aggressive moves since decades. They are forcing Ukraine to defend itself and yes, those are also working class people.
So you, as a good socialist, are probably on the barricades because of this unprovoked attack on the Ukrainian working class. How are you fighting to defend them from getting killed? Please don’t answer something in the likes of „Ukraine should give up“ because then everyone would only see that you are actually advocating the Murder of the Ukrainian people.
Well you’ve jumped to conclusions there, I’m not talking about the war but Billionaires in general and their respective countries in general.
Billionaires have too much power, live outside the existing system of government and laws, gained their money and power through exploitation and in general are undemocratic.
So I agree with your second statement, but not the first
They should exist, but we are not utilizing them correctly. Once someone has reached a billion dollar networth then they are thrown a big party and then sacrificed to a valcono. I believe this would curb emissions and fix climate change.
There was a native American tribe that every ten years had individuals return all personal wealth back to the tribe and the threw a big party, then start it all over again
They just need to make a point system. The incredibly wealthy don’t care about money itself, those are already just points to them. So once you get to say 100 M, you get a trophy saying you won capitalism. After that amount 99% is taxed, you get a penny on the dollar. But all of that taxed money gets you Capitalism points. Capitalism points have no real value and can only be exchanged/traded/gambled with other winners of capitalism. Those with most points will be published each month in the top 100. And the top 10 each year get the prestigous title if honorary economic leader. They can get a medal and a pat on the back by the president.
You can also donate extra money for more capitalism points at a 10:1 exchange rate to get people to play the game even harder and further drive down wealth.
(I believe there are slightly less than 10,000 people in the US who would currently get their capitalism trophy. There are >140,000 people worth more than $50M, is 100 to high?)
Oh and the 100M amount is pegged to minimum wage. Any increase to the capitalism cap has to be matched to the same percent increase to minimum wage.
It’s not a protest if it doesn’t inconvenience who you’re protesting. All real protesters are arrested, because they inconvenience power (who have but the way made all inconvenient protests illegal).
I’m proud of these guys for standing up for what they believe in. Solidarity.
Protest should intend on being an inconvenience, though arrest should be avoided if at all possible. It absolutely kills longevity and leads to people making arrest a core intention while rambling about non-violence. Really what you want is to have strategy and numbers that spook cops enough to not bother because they won’t if they think its going to be too much trouble for them.
While they are released it assists the police with intelligence gathering. In the UK police are known for giving bail conditions like “you can’t meet within more than 4 people”
Yeah they’ve been doing that for so long the American first amendment includes the right to “peaceably assemble”. And I should be clear these arrests are absolutely a breach of our rights. In the US it would be unthinkable for someone carrying a gun to be arrested without provocation.
TL;DW - he needs reference screen grabs to make his screen accurate props, but lately in browser DRM has been making it harder and harder to take screenshots (specifically using a Mac on Amazon streaming service). So if he gets frustrated enough, he’ll just torrent a HQ copy and use that instead.
DRM is making it annoying for everyone, and you never own anything if you don’t have an unrestricted local copy.
I absolutely hate this trend. If my eyeballs can see it, the camera on my phone can. Or a cheap HDMI capture card with a leaked HDCP key. They just want to screw over non-techie people who don’t know about these workarounds.
My ROG Strix main board somehow didn’t support(?, idk what word would be accurate) Microsoft .NET Try using Windows with that. (That is intact why I used Linux for the first time) After a year or so I got tired of .NET not working and switched out my main board(to MSI). Everything worked perfectly fine since then. I don’t even know how that’s even possible
Bruh it just didn’t work, I still have this shit ass main board. Linux worked almost completely fine on it(besides some windows applications) but Windows itself would run until I switched the main board. I just used this phrase because I’ve skipped over it in a forum while figuring this issue.
I believe that you had issues. I can also easily believe that ASUS makes a board or windows drivers/software prone to problems. The specific cause you claim to have identified is simply absurd.
I bought an album off iTunes last year in September. I made the mistake of joining Apple Music and it completely fucked my offline music library. So I had to revert to a backup prior to September.
Went back to download that album and was told I couldn’t because it’s no longer available in my region.
It’s okay to buy it but you can somehow lose access to it because rights expired that had no bearing on you.
It’s fucking stupid and they wonder why people pirate when they pull shit like this.
I have the opposite experience. I have a heap of MP3s and flacs and those live on some hard drives.
Apple Music was like “wanna twy?” And I was like “aite sure”. I love having lossless of basically everything when I’m not at home, and iOS doesn’t touch my at-home collection.
I guess the problem is buying DRM music. I never trusted any of that.
Music purchased from the iTunes Store is DRM free though. I think they actually upgraded purchases made prior to this change to DRM free versions (called iTunes Plus or something).
It used to work for me for years and then it gave it up for some reason I can’t remember. Though this was under iTunes Match which is still sort of the same thing, just exclusively for uploading music but no streaming what you haven’t uploaded or purchased.
Though, it did replace some of my music for clean versions which I despise. Music I’ve had for decades and have no copies of any longer…I would be morally justified pirating the right copies, but it’s too many to go through.
What they did this last time was that they replaced more of my music with different versions. I’m talking very different versions to what my CDs had from back when these were CDs my dad let me rip when I was a teen decades ago and they replaced some of my music with versions that didn’t download correctly and couldn’t be played anymore. Almost like corrupt copies.
My offline music library was a mess. 60+ GB worth of music, most of it was inaccessible anymore and would give me strange errors like it wasn’t available in my region anymore despite it being music I uploaded. Apparently others have experienced similarly recently and the only fix was if you have a backup to restore from backup.
That is super fucked and I’m so sorry that happened.
Replacing for clean versions though, that’s hilarious. Like WHY?!
I’m not blaming you AT ALL because software should never fuck with your music irreparably. I’m just paranoid something is going to go wrong with my collection I’ve curated for 15+ years, I keep it backed up on multiple drives now.
…after I had a HDD die.
I do love Apple Music though. It’s super cheap for having lossless shit everywhere, and I’m not a shill I PROMISE I USE LINUX ALSO AND UNFORTUNATELY PREDOMINATELY WINDOWS 10 AAAAAAAAAA
GN absolutely destroys Linus in this video. I mean Linus gave him all the ammo by repeatedly lying and not owning up his mistakes, but still. He’s calling like it is, without any sugarcoating.
Compared to sifting though God knows how many hours of LMG content to find this information yourself, it sure is. I was aware of perhaps two of the data accuracy issues Steve presents, prior to the GN video. And I had no idea about the Billet Labs thing, or that an LTX charity auction even happened.
That's what good reporting does. It takes complex issues with disparate data points, then makes connections and filters out the noise to make it digestible to a wide audience. It may be a long video, but having watched the whole thing, I'd say at least 90% of it is necessary to make the points being conveyed.
GN just assembled everything into a easily digestable package.
It was Linus’s Ego that destroyed Linus.
Absolutely. I once had an absolutely terrible boss, 10000% a sociopath and I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see a headline that said she’d been caught with multiple bodies buried under her house, but I’m still thankful for the experience because of one sentence that she said to me:
“People fire themselves.”
And that’s 100% true.
She then quoted Stalin’s “Death of one is a tragedy, death of a million is a statistic” as justification for trying to fire an entire department immediately after that though, so maybe it was just an infinite number of monkeys on typewriters situation. Either way, it gave me whiplash.
Yeah, I’m going to go ahead and say I strongly disagree with this. In some scenarios, people get fired because of something they did. However, if you have a company that consistently fires a large number of employees, then the people getting fired aren’t the problem. It is more likely that the manager is the problem.
I had a boss that consistently fired about 25-30 percent of their department every year and replaced people. Every time someone got fired, it was somehow their own fault. In reality, that boss was just horrible and kept treating everybody in the department like they were beneath her. Besides the firing, quitting rate was pretty high and the department had high turnover. The only consistent people that stayed were people who are personal buddies with the boss.
youtu.be
Top