Not to mention, some companies right now are abusing interview candidates to get free work with “trial project” type assignments, or “How would you fix this problem, if you were hired?” type of free consultations. If some candidates abused the companies in return, I’d call that fair play.

Look at this guy with his fancy bottom sheets.

We got one of these a few years ago and boy, is it a game changer. Highly recommend to anyone.

I’d be more concerned if someone isn’t worried about the future, to be honest.

It’s most likely the one you’re given each time you go for a physical (or at least, we are where I live) - it’s more like:

In the past week, how often have you…

• Worried about the future
• Felt that you can’t do anything right
• Had trouble focusing on common tasks
• Felt hopeless or depressed
• …etc

with options like “Never”, “Rarely”, “Most days”, “Almost all of the time”

You can, however, ignore the second ability if you use your Reaction to say ‘No homo’.

So do bats. I propose we trade all of the wasps for some quantity of bats.

“No Diggity.” “Is that your final answer?” “No doubt.”

Right, that’s what the canals are useful for, what did you think they meant?

Perhaps it is not the entire world who is stupid while you’re one of a select few intelligent enough to really know what’s going on.

I’m not sure where you got the impression that that was at all what I was saying, but just to restate, the complaint was that the above points never even make it into the conversation when this comes up. The discourse is always ‘Robots are taking away our jobs’, and it completely misses the ‘…and that would be okay if we took steps to ensure everyone’s prosperity’ followup.

I’m not saying we should stop opposing this stuff because an alternative exists where it’s okay, I’m saying that we should be actively talking about that alternative every time this comes up, because the vast majority of people [in the US] are not used to even hearing it.

I agree with you, I just hate that it rarely ever even makes it into the conversation. “We need to regulate this new technology until we pass this other legislation that we are actively working towards which I will now outline” would be far more productive than just “This is bad and we need to ban it.”

The reasons related to them occupying sidewalks and whatnot are totally reasonable, but I really hate when something like this is opposed because it will take jobs from delivery drivers. That’s such a backwards way of thinking. “Humans need to work because working is how we make money and we need money to live” Sure, but like… what if we didn’t need money to live? What if the increased ‘free’ labor that things like this provide was just… shared equitably among everyone in the community? What if we had UBI so people didn’t need to work gig economy jobs that could be done by robots?

But no, that’s crazy talk. The orphan crushing machine must keep running at all costs.

Wow. Saw the price and thought, “That’s not bad, really.” Then I realized that was for one die, not the whole set.

Hate to tell you…

My wife and I both work; she makes about 150% of what I do. This ‘woman bad lol’ rhetoric should just stick to Reddit or 4chan.

It’s saying Copilot was the first on the scene and had access to literally all of the training data anyone could possibly want, and is still being shown up by most other AI models. Their failure to capture the vibe coding space is a legendary fumble. At least that was my read.

Can’t tell what size it is, but it looks like maybe 11x14 or larger?. Check prices here (purely for general comparison): https://www.michaels.com/shop/frames

Absolute cheapest they come is $5, and they go up considerably from there.

Art is subjective; it’s worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it, but frames have a non-subjective value and it’s at least $5 in this case.

I mean, honestly, the frame looks nice, that alone is probably worth at least $5. The painting is just getting thrown in for free.

Then there’s those incredibly annoying instances where you find a post by someone having the exact issue you are, and they reply to their own post with “Found a solution - issue is resolved”, but don’t note what the solution was. Those people are infuriating.

Like most things in life, in moderation it can be fun. Adding some stakes to an activity can make it more exciting.

It becomes a problem when people don’t have the self-control to self-regulate, and when it’s designed to prey upon those people specifically, or to prey on desperate people who feel like it’s the only chance they have to get ahead, or who don’t have a good understanding of the risks or chances of winning.

Humans as a whole are bad at understanding probability, and our brains are wired such that the happy chemicals we get from winning are more impactful than the unhappy chemicals we get from losing. As such, someone can be losing money overall, but still feel like they’re winning, or at least, still get the rush from winning even though they’re way down overall. That’s dangerous, and gambling companies are designed to specifically target those people and exploit those destructive behaviors. It’s like the experiment with the rat that was given a button to give itself happy drugs, and it just sat there pressing the button constantly. Basically, the regulations are necessary because of capitalism, and because without them, those people would very quickly ruin their lives given the chance while the companies running the operation give zero fucks about it.

Then there’s the fraud. Look at prediction markets. They’re rife with fraud and bet fixing and it’s not only politicians and policymakers doing it. John Oliver had a piece on this recently where he goes into some detail, but there’ve also been articles about journalists getting harassed and threatened because they report on something that would cause a Polymarket loss.

In conclusion, some humans are shitty and we need regulations to keep shitty people from doing shitty things.