There’s definitely logic behind wanting to boycott their art so that you are not indirectly supporting their decisions by giving them the money to continue to do the things that they’re doing.

Of course, that is also a separate decision from whether you like the art or whether you like the artist.

Anyone trying to tie these things together is generally not someone I would want to associate with.

That’s fair. You can like something but refuse to support it.

I’m mainly taking issue with anyone who says that if you don’t like the artist, you can’t appreciate the art. I’ve heard it a few times (or some variation of it), and IMO, that’s far too common already.

I’m not a swiftie, and I’m male, so take my words as you will in that context.

Simply: IMO, it is possible to appreciate someones artistry while disliking their personal value system and actions.

Just because someone is a good artist, does not and should not imply that they are good.

Both liking someone’s music and disliking their decisions as a person, can both be true. I hate the plethora of false dichotomy arguments that you can’t appreciate music made by a person if that person is considered a bad person. One does not mean the other cannot be true.

I’m out of the loop, who died now?

Where’s my pitchfork?

Healthcare should not be profit driven.

You asked me to.

I’m glad that I live in a country with socialized healthcare.

🎶 five dollar foot longggg 🎶

Our bones are more beautiful than yours.

I scrolled WAY too far before I saw this.

I scrolled past several other Diablo lines before I found this.

How?

YOU HAVE NO CHANCE TO SURVIVE. MAKE YOUR TIME.

Outlook is a long list unto itself of random crap that’s probably going to go wrong.

To be fair, it’s not like word or Excel are any less complex, but people tend to know those apps way better for some reason.

The Web version is taking over. Just like they did with teams, they’re starting a webview version of Outlook. They’re very creative this time, calling it “new Outlook” 🤦‍♂️

It’s all very dumb.

I completely agree on the view settings too. It’s like a world unto itself just to sort and organize a single view of Outlook. I helped one user the other day, who simply wanted to see everything as conversations. It’s an easy fix, and it wasn’t the reason they logged a ticket, but it took about 8 seconds and I was already connected to their system.

Do office workers not have a requirement to learn basic MS office skills anymore?

I’m a lot like you. For the most part, I try to look beyond the question being asked, and find the root cause. If the root cause is because of a skill issue, I’ll direct them to the next logical resource. If it’s not a skill issue, or I can’t determine that it’s a skill issue, then I’ll continue to test until I can make that determination.

9 times out of 10, if I find a solution to make a thing work in a program, I’ll share that with them, and let them take it from there.

A lot of the people I support are working in the finance space and my company has an entire support department for finance applications. I’ll either bounce the problem off of them, or just direct them to the finance support team for guidance.

This wasn’t either of those things. It wasn’t even asking how. It was straight up telling me to do a thing for them, in a program they should know how to use. It’s not a complex finance program or anything, it’s literally Outlook.

The short version is that I explained that we have a company policy that we are support, not education.

This is not a support issue because no technical issue is preventing the user from getting this completed.

I work in IT. I usually call my job “IT support” but I’m also technically the system admin, and network admin.

Today, I had someone ask me to delete a calendar for them in Outlook. It wasn’t a shared or special calendar, it was literally just a calendar in their normal outlook.

Bear in mind, they didn’t ask how to do it. They asked me to do it.

That’s a skill issue right there. I’m not in the business of doing other people’s work for them. Now and then I’ll entertain the odd request of “how do I do x” and show someone how to get something done, mainly because it’s a lot less effort than telling them that I didn’t go to university for teaching, and all three ensuing arguments thereafter, because there’s always arguments.

But this was straight up “do my job for me”.

Lol, no, I have my own shit to do.

I would argue that it’s common sense to at least make a point in time copy, to… IDK, a USB drive? Before trying to implement a new source/control system.

Just plug in an external drive, or a thumb drive, copy/paste, unplug it, then proceed with testing.

I don’t see how anyone who values their time and effort could do any less.

As for the files, undelete is a thing, and it shouldn’t be hard to do.

While I have some sympathy for anyone who loses months of work, as an IT administrator by day, all I have to say about their lack of backups, and lack of RTFM before messing with shit is:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHA. you got what you deserved fucker. GL.YF.

Even with the years he has as a disadvantage, I would not have bet against Tyson.

It was genuinely surprising that he didn’t win.

To be fair, it went to the judges, and they decided that Tyson didn’t do as well as what’s-his-face… And looking at the numbers, it wasn’t by much.

Say what you will about the man himself, but Tyson knows his sport and he’s damn good at it.

With all that being said, what a crock of shit to waste so much time and effort so that some YouTube wannabe can match up against a retiree. Tyson won more fights than pretty boy has even officially fought, before that dickhead left his daddy’s nutsack. Let me put that another way, there was no time in this guy’s life where Tyson had yet to win a championship. He’s been a world champion for tube boy’s entire life.

As far as I’m concerned, Tyson was in it for the payday. Win or lose, Tyson was walking away on top.

I recently purchased a blade enclosure.

I might be in this meme.

I learned all about this in “thinking fast and slow” by Daniel Kahneman. He talks about system 1 and system 2, where system 1 is your kind of knee-jerk reaction to a thing (thinking fast), and system 2 is the contemplative and careful consideration of a thing (thinking slow).

I would argue that some people overly leverage system 1 (thinking fast) because it’s generally easier, and takes less time and mental effort to do. Those that either can’t, or are unwilling to engage system 2 in their day to day activities, will 100% fall for these kinds of misleading prices, since system 1 is cutting so many corners so that it can be fast and efficient (mostly on how much energy is used), that it skips a lot of the cognitive steps and goes right to the (often incorrect) conclusion. That $19.99 is $19 (or $10 in some cases).

In the book, they discuss that system 1 often gives the wrong information that is later rejected my system 2 when further consideration is given to a particular input/stimulus.

If someone isn’t engaging system 2 as a check to ensure system 1 isn’t lying to them, then shit like $19.99 seems cheaper than $20. It doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny, but they’re not targeting thoughtful people with these practices. For thoughtful people, there’s functionally no difference between $19.99 and $20.

Yes, the difference is one cent, but given that one cent is so worthless in today’s society, to the point that Canada stopped making one cent coins (and other countries have done so as well), there’s functionally no difference between the prices.

One cent is only worth anything if it is combined with many other cents. The sum of those pennies becomes valuable when you conglomerate enough of them.

I’ll admit, this works on me sometimes.

I hate that it does, but it do.