Funny that predictive text seems to be more advanced in this instance but I suppose this is one of those scenarios that you want to make sure you get right.
Every 1 minute, 3L of water gets heated by 50K. With a specific heat capacity of 4200 J / kg / C and density of 1 g / mL, it takes 3 x 4200 x 50 = 630000J per minute.
With a rate of 4.0 x 10^4 J / g for the heater, we can get the rate of combustion with 630000 / 40000 = 15.75 g per minute.
I had that dog as my interviewer too, but I made the wrong decision.
When I got the to interview, I immediately remindend him that when I saw him on the street, I said “Sorry I can’t feed you, I have a job interview so that I can get food. You should pull yourself up by your own bootstraps and get an interview so you too can get some food.” And he said “Yes, I took your advice and arrived here first and got the job you were going to interview for, so you’re fired.”
Brexit was the best experiment for that. They kick immigrants out so all jobs went to the local population. People didn’t want them, produce was left in the fields, deliveries were not made, tables were not waited on and some companies folded. Anyway, immigration is now back and higher than it used to be, but from other countries.
It's as much Star Trek as the unofficial Trek movie Galaxy Quest. Doesn't matter if the characters and universe are different, it's got the same vibe to fit in.
I can understand why. The motivations and message are a bit deeper than WoK. But UC wouldn't have happened (in the same way) without WoK first, since I don't think Kirk had the same hatred towards Klingons before. Distrust sure, but not revenge level hate.
UC also has that connection with one of the best TNG episodes, Yesterday's Enterprise.
I think the humour in the first few episodes was Mcfarlens way of sneaking the show past the network suits - he sold it as family guy meets star trek, then switched on them once it was established.
Literally the case, the first couple eps were written for fartjock executives. Ep 4 onwards were written for the show. It’s why there’s a sudden stratospheric upswing
Honestly I kind of wanted them to keep more of the humorous tone. I know a lot of people hated it and thought it was distracting, but I thought it was a pretty unique take on the genre. I wish they’d toned it down without going full space opera.
Edit: Can y’all please stop downvoting this person for being confused? Rule number one. Be kind. They’re not being a dick here or being cruel or anything. Give them the benefit of the doubt please.
JK Rowling is the author of Harry Potter and was primarily known for this. Loved, even, for this. An enormous fanbase. Not to say that there weren’t issues with her portrayal of POC characters or doses of antisemitic behavior (The Goblin Bank literally has a MASSIVE Star of David in the middle of their lobby) but people still loved her nonetheless.
Yet overtime she started adding random stupid things to canon. People asking about bathrooms and her randomly tweeting in response that wizards used to just shit themselves and then magic it all away. This happened more and more with all manner of subjects that started to really point out she was a piece of shit. When people started talking about her portrayal of various different characters, she sort of went off the deep end. She started getting really entrenched in her position and bitter towards everyone. One of these positions was that trans homies are not homies. The typical “mental illness/grooming/rapists” reasoning. Her position within the fandom fell into utter freefall and fractured an enormous amount of said fandom. This then bled into popular culture as a whole because she’s such a popular and influential public figure. She just kept digging and digging and digging and now she’s primarily known online as “That bigoted bitch who wrote the wizard books”. The entire Harry Potter franchise has become slightly toxic to the touch. Hogwarts Legacy was released to immense backlash and almost none of it was the fact that the game was a raging, repetitive and extremely badly written pile of hot garbage that had no character development or story consequences. Even the actor who played Hermione (not sure about others) came out and said that they would have nothing to do with a Harry Potter continuation or reboot if JK Rowling was involved in any way whatsoever which is what led JK and WB to team up to remake the Harry Potter series. There has been a TV show that was announced with JK herself being heavily involved.
While still a massive franchise and a massive fandom, Harry Potter has aggressively slouched in those ratings and has been inextricably linked to the personal opinions of the author formerly known as JK Rowling. Honestly I just refer to her as “that transphobic bitch who wrote about the wizards” most of the time now.
Thank you for the very detailed explanation. I knew who she was but not about any of this. I read one or two of the books when they first came out but never really got into it. Also thank you for pointing out that just because someone does not know about the thing you like, does not make them a troll. I just wanted to understand the image.
Hey, you asked. I try my best to be helpful when I can.
Also, of course. I’m trying my best to make this place welcoming for everyone except trolls and bigots. You are neither. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt until given a reason otherwise. Can’t say that I don’t fuck up a lot but I’m trying to help make Lemmy a better place than most other internet rabbitholes.
No, thank you! With how often I post, I try my best to maintain that. Especially as a mod of !memes. Trying to not come off like the mods of that other place.
Even the actors of Harry and Hermione (not sure about others) came out and said that they would have nothing to do with a Harry Potter continuation or reboot if JK Rowling was involved
Source on this? Curious because the only thing I can find Radcliffe saying is “I’m very excited to see what other people do with it. The comparison I’ve made is to a story like Sherlock Holmes. I think the Potter series of books was always gonna be bigger than one interpretation or one franchise, so it’ll be cool to see the torch get passed on.”
Visually, yes. However the actual gameplay loop becomes hyper repetitive within the space of 2-3 hours and that the plot is genuine garbage that has no resolution or consequences.
I cannot find a single redeeming part of the storyline at all. It’s all hyper contrite, characters motivations/personalities seem to make no sense, the random seasonal jumps are jarring and demonstrate how little characters grow, and the ending literally has no consequence. I chose the ‘evil’ ending and nothing happened outside of that professor dying. Despite absorbing all the ancient energies of doom that these 4 paintings had sealed away, not a single one of them cared despite them insisting on me stopping someone else who was doing precisely the same thing. Despite them saying that no one should have that type of power. I rocked up with said power and they’re just like “Hey Jason.”
The entrance to the Chamber of Secrets was literally built in a bathroom. She could have just said it was a Roman style bathroom that was later retrofitted to be modern.
And Dumbledore let's Harry know about the Room of Requirements by telling a story about how he once needed a chamberpot. A magic chamberpot? Sure. Makes more sense than shitting himself.
I agree with this for the most part, but saying Hogwarts Legacy objectively sucks is just wrong. Most people liked the game, including me (although the main story plot is not great).
Hogwarts Legacy is rife with problems and those problems are objective. It’s not based on opinion.
It’s so funny when people try to claim that their opinion is objective. Sorry bro, this is still your opinion. LOTS of people enjoyed the game, and if people enjoyed the game safe to say it did its job.
The basic standards of a game is “is it fun”. If people had fun then it served it’s purpose. Just because you didn’t like it doesn’t mean it’s an objectively bad game. I highly doubt your opinion on the game is free of external biases
Bad news… Hogwarts legacy sold like hot cakes, it was massively successful title…two things can be right. JKR being a bigot and you being completely fucking wrong.
You didn’t give objective reasons, you just gave some opinions about how the gameplay is repetitive. Like I said, games are meant to be fun. If someone had fun, it did not “fail to perform”. The reason I believe you are biased is because you are the op of this thread lmao
I’m pretty sure what you’re missing here is that you did give (arguably) objective descriptions of issues with the game, but it’s still your opinion that these make the game a failure. Sure, it didn’t meet up to your standards, but those standards are absolutely subjective.
Lots of games are repetitive. Lots of games have no story consequences shown in the game. They still succeed at being games, even if they don’t meet your standards.
I get it, you are passionate about this, but you’re mistaken at this point.
I really hope that they’re joking. Then again, part of the problem hotels have against Airbnb is that there are regulations that hotels have to comply with that Airbnbs don’t (in most cities, I know some cities have put restrictions on Airbnb and more eventually will). So if they’re not joking, I can see in that context why it could be a serious question.
Maybe it’s a generational thing, or it’s because the Internet let’s everyone say what they’re thinking, but there’s been a ton of things being uselessly reinvented these past few years.
I have a feeling it’s just because people try to find new ways to scam others though.
Edit:
Lol there’s even another post showing someone reinventing libraries
it indeed is scamming. it's also taking advantage of the fact that you can circumvent laws by being an app that does a regulated thing and get away with it for several years because the average politician is 80 and needs interns to help them send an email. straight up ignoring laws by using an app as a cover also allows you to get VC funding by posing as a tech company. tech companies have a history of growing stupid fast and have a theoretical potential userbase of all 8 billion people thanks to the internet so by being an app you can pretend your unlicensed taxi company or unlicensed hotel company is the next google or amazon.
Medium.com is absolutely rotten for this behaviour.
Not only putting the soft, “sign in to view” but then on some articles requiring a full hard paywall… But you only know this after signing in.
I’m not entirely against charging for well written articles; good writers deserve compensation, but don’t tease me, make me jump through a hoop only to find there’s another much higher hoop sitting beyond it.
I have no idea. But my gripe is the lack of a clear notice that “this is a paid article and you must be paid member to view it”, it just says words to the effect “sign in to view”.
A bit over a year ago, I tried writing on Medium, and what I found was no, not really anyway. Medium was putting the soft paywall on all of my posts, without me asking or benefiting from it other than hosting, though I could choose to make them hard paywalled. It was my impression at the time that they would only let you unpaywall your articles on there if you paid them that ransom, instead of every reader (by being a member). You could argue that the authors choose to post there when there are alternatives anyway, so it’s still on the authors (and I do).
I’ve just cancelled my Medium subscription. I was finding myself going there less and less. So many articles saying the same thing in various levels of broken English.
Libredirect doesn’t check and update working instances, if I recall correctly with libredirect you have to manually add instances to the list and can only ping the provided ones manually
There’s a few userscripts on greasyfork for it as well
You can also use farside on browsers that don’t support userscripts just by modifying a url
It has been particularly useful for browsing reddit pages without actually going to reddit because I’m not going to give spez my data and libreddit instances sometimes max out on requests so I just have to close and open tabs until I have a working instance
don't leave out his destruction of the media as a balanced source of information when he signed the veto that killed the Fairness Doctrine. fuck that guy so hard.
Don’t forget trickle down economics, we can also thank Ronnie R for that too! And ignoring the AIDS epidemic for years, because that only hurt “the coloreds and gays”.
Yeah. One of my favourite restaurants closed a couple months ago because they just couldn't justify charging more for food, but their suppliers sure could.
It’s not the supplier “bleeding them” the supplier has the exact same problem the restaurant has, inflation, if they don’t raise the prices they go bankrupt. It’s a vicious cycle of everyone raising prices not to go bankrupt which causes everyone else to do the same.
If you don’t think suppliers are using inflation to justify robber-baron price hikes, I guess you missed the part where companies are posting record profits.
Inflation drives all the numbers up. If money inflates to half the value but you maintain the same profit margins, you'll make record profits despite the finances having functionally remained exactly the same.
Workers are also making record wages. It doesn't mean much if you don't consider how much the money is actually worth, as we've all been discovering over the last few years.
so why not just lower the profit margins? also give me some of them record wages please, all I got was a bottle of champagne for all the work weve done and record profits but also raises in pay are frozen because of the turbulent times
Average hourly wage at the start of 2020 was $24. It's now $29, which comes to about $10,000 more each year, and is an increase of about 21%. That growth has been concentrated in the service industry, but the data is pretty clear regardless, and the general trend applies to basically all sectors. Inflation in that same time period is 18.1%, so it simply is a matter of fact that the average worker has greater buying power today than they did in January 2020.
That's an average, of course, and may not necessarily apply to you individually.
You got champagne? All I got was runaround, brand new policies pulled out of thin air, and creative counting to deny seniority benefits. Turns out, I’ve worked for the same place 30 years when it inflates their retention and longevity numbers for the oversight agencies. I’ve also worked there for only a year (started a new position last year) when it suits them to deny a published benefit. The completely mindboggling part? These two countings were in the same email.
Workers are not making record wages, maybe CEOs and the upper middle class are but nobody else is. Maybe this is specific to America? Nearly everyone I know across multiple wage brackets I struggling with the cost of living.
I think that’s exactly it. I don’t know for sure, but these numbers may be average wages. And if that’s the case, having the top % or earners earn more while the bottome stays the same would still increase the average And would increase the divide between the top earners and bottom earners
Wage growth in the US has been most pronounced in the lower end of the market. Growth-oriented businesses like tech are a lot more sensitive to interest rate spikes, since their entire model is to borrow a ton of money to pay highly skilled workers a lot to "disrupt" an industry and achieve very rapid growth.
That isn't necessarily contradictory with still struggling, since inflation exists. If you suddenly make 10% more money but everything costs 10% more as well, you are objectively making record wages, even though your buying power remains the same. Per that report, inflation-adjusted wages have actually grown on the lower end of the job market, so the average low-wage worker's buying power has actually increased, but general statistics don't always translate over to real-life experience super cleanly, and of course, a slight improvement from a bad financial situation doesn't suddenly put you in a good situation.
I know who is right because I’m not some bottom-tier employee parroting what I’ve heard. My job requires me to work with our finance team, M&A team, COO, and SG&A team as part of overarching strategy.
Huzzah for our current system of capitalism that insists a company is only doing good if each quarter has record profits. What’s bad with doing “good enough?”
This concept of greedflation has been disproved in recent meta-analysis. It should probably die. I’ll copy paste a comment I wrote in some other thread analyzing it.
I think everyone should probably listen to this great report from NPR that dissects this issue. The Tl;dr: is greedflation is not really a real thing.
The deeper answer to your question of, “can one party increase prices in a market?” is sort of basic economics, and the answer is, “Usually, no.” In a competitive market, the answer is no. In a monopolistic market (meaning one company controls most of the market, think like Google with browsers) with no government oversight, the answer is yes. Things get complicated when you add in government regulation or oligopolistic markets (markets where only a few players control the market). In those cases, it depends on how strong government regulations on price-gouging are and any anti-monopoly or anti-anticompetitive practice laws are, and also depends on how oligopolists behave. Sometimes, particularly in industries with few big players, the big players will make the same decisions independently. If they do this cooperating it will usually violate antitrust laws, but if they both decide they’ll be better off say, not paying workers as much, or charging super high markups, them that can happen. A lot of economic research shows that kind of “tacit collusion” happens in real life, like in the oil and gas industries. But other times oligopolies will behave very competitively, only uniting through lobbyist trade groups if at all (think Microsoft and Amazon in cloud software).
So that’s the facts, but here’s my economic musing: The reason it feels like greedflation is a thing is a combination of factors:
Inflation was very real, and very salient.
Corporations (as mentioned in the NPR piece) crowed about their “record profits” in the short term, and also mention them when they are absolute record profits, not just record profit margins (something not mentioned but very real - a company can make twice as much money but also have spent twice as much, making way “more” money but with identical margins)
In the US at least, we are seeing the highest numbers of industry consolidation and monopolies/oligopolies since the Gilded Age, so it feels like companies should be able to raise their prices if they want to.
Media coverage and online spaces have become extremely polarized, so “corporations bad” is a very easy refrain to find if you’re watching or reading anything remotely left-wing, and it has been parroted by many democratic politicians as well, because it scores cheap and easy political points (also, and this is just my opinion, it helps vilify corps more in the public eye to help get more support for better antitrust legislation and enforcement, the actual end goal. I don’t think senators like Bernie Sanders don’t actually understand what’s going on with profit margins, I think they’re using it to generate political will, but that may be my own bias creeping in).
Every place I used to eat pretty much. And they cheap out on cheap shit too, like fries and rice. I used to work at a restaurant and the owner always taught me to fill up the sides cause it makes people feel they got their money’s worth
I’m out of software the first chance I get. I hate it. Tech is no longer fun and inventive, it’s exploitative and designed to milk the most money out of every user.
I don’t even particularly care about the capitalist part. I just find that the new things are no longer fun, but terrifying and causing anxiety about the future. I used to love keeping up with the newest stuff, but I already feel like a Luddite after the last few years
Same. Streaming services reinvented cable. The open web is increasingly hidden behind paywalls. Instead of having the sum of all human knowledge at your fingertips, you have 5 billion tiny creators begging you to sign up for their goat-fat candle-making course on udacity. You can’t look in any direction without advertisers stabbing you in the eyes and claiming that it’s their god-given right to scream their snake-oil sales pitch directly into your brain; and if you install an ad blocker you’re the one stealing food out of content creators mouths, not the ~5 people who control 50 % of the total wealth of humanity…
I’m with you. I’m so completely and utterly over working in IT. The industry used to be full of companies founded by people who loved tech, and were staffed by kids who grew up on Lego and Logo. Today these same businesses are owned by investors who don’t know the first thing about technology, and staffed by grown up kids who were told by their guidance counselor that IT was a high paying field. Nobody knows their ass from a hole in the ground anymore, and getting anyone remotely competent on the phone is like pulling teeth. If I could bail on this industry tomorrow and build picnic tables I’d never look back.
lemmy.world
Top