In addition to the rating it should have an ugly warning on all its promotional material, like cigarettes.
"Warning: this game requires additional in-game purchases and gambling to access all of its content". On the screen for the entire duration of any trailer.
IDK, apply that logic to anything else.
Suppose someone says "I hate having to change my car's motor oil and I hate the effect oil dependency has on the world", then I say "you should consider getting an electric car, they're way cheaper and better than they used to be".
Am I now on the hook to solve that person's car troubles forever? Do I have to plan every roadtrip for them so they can hit the necessary charging stations?
Likewise, if that person has a problem or it turns out that an electric car can't meet their needs and they have to switch back to gas is it my fault? Is it the fault of every electric car owner for talking about them and advocating for them?
I don't think you should be an asshole to someone asking for help on a forum (though that's not what the tumble post above is even about? They just seem to be complaining about their technical issue being too hard or the explanations being too verbose?), but I do think that if someone went onto the electric vehicles community and posted "I live in the middle of Alaska and drive 400 miles uphill through the snow at -40 every day! How DARE you think EVs are ready for the mainstream!?!" once a day like people do to Linux coms the EV people would start to get annoyed pretty fast.
Funny, but presumably that's a Ukrainian explaining the terrible consequences of war.
Careful, similar to kudzu or bamboo Ethernet can be invasive in some environments and quickly grow out of hand:
In some ways phone cameras are very impressive, since CCDs are now cheap and good enough that they're no longer the bottleneck. All the computational photography stuff they do boosts their capabilities even more.
The thing that really limits them is the size and optical quality of their lenses.
90% of the things they named weren't cars but in practice if you actually compare cities with tons of cars vs ones with few you'll find that removing cars removes 90% of the noise.
My condolences.
Trying to create a cheap microwave burrito that's also healthy and filling seems like a pretty noble (if difficult) goal to me. Making it vegetarian also decreases its ecological impact (though I don't know whether or not Adams cared about that).
Trying to fortify each burrito with 100% of your daily vitamins was a really stupid idea though. It was unnecessary (just take a multivitamin if you feel like you need it), it made the burrito taste worse (Adams described it as "chalky"), and it was potentially unhealthy if someone were to eat multiple burritos per day (and thus receive multiple times the recommended daily dose of... everything).
US auto-domination isn't even the result of market forces though.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of laissez-faire policy or capitalism in general, but government funded highway lanes are no more capitalist than government funded rail tracks. The current situation in the US required enormous government intervention to establish, in the form of the forced seizure of property to make way for highways, hundreds of billions of dollars (inflation adjusted) to build those highways, mandatory parking minimums for new construction (to store all the cars from the highway), government subsidies for suburban style development and later on tax schemes that resulted in poorer inner city areas subsidizing wealthy suburbs, and zoning laws that made it illegal to build a business in a residential area (which worked together with anti-loitering laws to make it so that if you didn't live in a neighborhood you had no "legitimate" reason to be there. It's not a coincidence this happened in the wake of desegregation.)
Similarly fossil fuel production in the US actually receives direct government subsidies at the federal and sometimes state level (some of which have been in effect since 1916).
Now, we can get into the weeds and talk about how government action is actually a necessary part of capitalism and the intertwined nature of power structures and so on and so forth, but it's important to remember that there's nothing inevitable or natural about the mess we're in right now, as some would have you believe. It required conscious planning and choices, as well as tremendous effort and tremendous injustice to get here.
In my personal experience I've had to go out of my way to find every quality product I've ever purchased, from dishwasher detergent to heat pumps, and none of them were the ones with the highest advertising budgets. You're right that we all have limited time and can't possibly evaluate every single thing that exists, but hype men don't help with that. The professional liars and manipulators that work in advertising only add to the noise and make it take longer to arrive at a conclusion. For example the fact that there are the 12 different brands of space heaters that come in different sizes and shapes and at different price points despite all performing the exact same way. It's like that with literally everything, from bar soap, to maple syrup, to sunscreen.
I think this way because I am autistic. I honestly cannot imagine feeling the need for hype men. The phrase "you need hype men" sounds to me like "you need your abuser, you cannot live without them".
Something like 35% of autistic people attempt suicide because of what the original post describes (and not just in science, but in every aspect of the world). And yeah, I think if I had to work for someone like Steve Jobs or Elon Musk I would as well.
It's funny you use Woz and Jobs as an example when Jobs regularly emotionally manipulated and abused his employees and stole Woz's money.
I wonder why schmoozers have a bad rep 🤔
Yep, this is already a solved problem.
About 60% of the people in Vienna live in public housing and its one of the best places in the world to live.
Tons of people in this thread are running around coming up with Rube Goldberg schemes of incentive structures and legal frameworks when the problem is really not that complicated.