Sometimes for gits and shiggles, I’ll check the one star reviews for things I know are going to trip inexperienced people up.
Like… It’s basically the “substituted flour with powdered eggplant and milk with tobacco sauce, 1/10 tasted horrible but I followed the recipe exactly” meme
Especially anything with DIY properties. “doesn’t work, connected to the battery and it immediately blew up” when it’s clear from the picture they hooked a 48v battery into a 12v speed controller. Or cut some wires they weren’t supposed to. Or reversed polarity of an important component. Or…
And rather than admit they fucked it up, they give bad reviews.
I particularly like when the listing is clearly for something that requires assembly, and bad reviews complain it came “in pieces”. READ, YOU DENSE MOTHERFUCKERS
And if you see a bunch of bad grammar, and inconsistent specs in a listing… Maybe don’t put too much faith in the $5 item that would cost $100 if you bought it from a licensed and certified source with quality assurance…
Why do they use [FedEx/UPS/USPS]?! [FedEx/UPS/USPS] can never find my house! [FedEx/UPS/USPS] is the WORST shipping service of all of them! Product is amazing though.
The EU should fine companies for introducing new standards that break old standards. Or any shit standards like Toslink: lemmy.world/comment/10671314 . Standardization organizations shouldn’t be sleeping through all this shit.
I don’t use screw drivers enough to know what these are for. But from a programmer’s standpoint, punishing people to deviate away from standard may cause more harm than good, no?
Suppose it’s easier/cheaper/more effective to deviate a bit from standard, why should I be punished to do things a bit differently?
Think about all the micro USB, lightning cables, USB cables etc. In programming it’s different, but for this stuff it’s a waste of money and actual resources.
One issue is that it can be leveraged to maintain a monopoly. Microsoft famously made a bunch of small modifications to the HTML standard, so that web sites that wanted to work with MS Internet Explorer had to write custom versions to be compatible. But because so many people just used IE because it was bundled with Windows, those “extensions” started to become their own standard, so that then other browsers had to adopt MS’s idiosyncrasies in order to be compatible with the sites, which in turn harmed standardization itself. They even had a term for this technique: “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.” It nearly worked for them until Google pushed them out with Chrome. Microsoft tried to do the same thing again with Java until the government got involved.
It’s complicated, certainly, but there are legitimate cases where “just a little tweak” can be quite a big problem for a standard.
Alex jones has a thing where he believes god tells him what time it is going to be before he sees the clock(waking him up in the middle of the night and telling him to check the microwave or whatever) and that proves he gets visions from god
Yknow my brain sometimes alerts me to a coming alarm the minute before it goes off too but I don’t get some hardon for God about it. What a fuckface. (Also the Sandy hook thing… Same guy right?)
I truly don’t understand. No matter how funny or unfunny, true or untrue, pro- or anti-Biden a post is - if it contains his name or face it gets downvoted like crazy.
Edit: I just scrolled further and found a counter example. My god…
To make it even less likely that someone will be able to get it unscrewed without having the right set.
They’re not perfect, obviously, but they do harden a target more than regular Torx.
I use tamper resistant screws to keep an AirTag on my eBike to discourage its removal. Obviously a determined thief could remove it, but lots of stolen bikes get abandoned anyway. My hope is that if it gets stolen it gets abandoned and I can find it then.
lemmyshitpost
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.