Does it need to be real just to be roasted?

Man you got such a weird hard on for this stance where you keep repeating the same thing over and over without actually providing a valuable argument.

So just in case you are not a bot and actually want the argument explained, here you go:

I want to watch movie A produced by Disney. As you say I have a ton of arguments to not support Disney. So I don't pay to watch the movie. Now there's two options left, I never watch the movie or I pirate the movie and watch it. By not watching it the only one that suffers is me, Disney couldn't give two shits if I watch it or not. By pirating the movie I get the two things I want, to watch the movie and to not support Disney.

By pirating the movie to watch it I am not impeding anyone's ability to watch it by paying Disney. I'm not taking anyone's movie, no one loses anything, except Disney who loses the money they want me to pay. All those who participated in making the movie are not losing their salaries, they were already paid for the work by Disney, I'm not stealing their salaries (unless they had a contract with Disney to get some % but I can't pay them without paying Disney)

Now let's say I'm a parent, my kids want to watch movie A of Disney, but I don't want to support Disney, do I punish Disney or do I punish my kids by not watching the movie? Or do I pirate the movie for my kids and still don't support Disney's shitty corporate behaviour?

Let's see if you still don't see the argument for piracy ffs

Very nice write up! Thanks for sharing it and taking the time to write it.

Who are you and how did you read my diary?

Actually the right side graph needs a correction from my point of view. The decline in productivity doesn't happen sharply when the meeting starts. For me the decline starts between 15 to 30 minutes before the meeting slowly, as I can hardly concentrate concerned that I might miss the start. If I'm ever in hyper concentration mode, most likely I'll miss the start of the meeting.

Why would you make the immigrants suffer his presence? They have it hard enough as it is. I prefer to think he'll get to make some nice friends in prison.

I'm so glad to see this posted. The whole meme of bear vs man made me feel at odds and while I saw what the point was that it tried to raise it still didn't really do a great job to me. After a lot of thinking about it and discussing it in other threads I finally understood what I feel is the issue. While the answer given by most (if not all) women is shocking and shows the feeling of uncertainty and unsafeness the question is framed in such a way that it creates division and sexism. The problem is not what women are answering, the issue is that it puts men on the other side without any more thought. It divides us into women vs either men or bears. I'm not a woman, I'm not a bear, and I don't want to be a man seen as a danger. I understand the issue and I want to be part of the solution and create a safer world for everyone.

This whole topic wouldn't have made me see the problem if it wasn't for the effect that other ways to raise awareness have had in the past. For me the greatest method to raise awareness was the #metoo movement. That's when I could see the issue and what kind of effect it has. It was a movement that didn't automatically make me feel excluded, it was a movement that raised awareness of the victims, but it didn't have to be only women, also men that had been victims could raise it if they felt empowered by it. It was horrifying seeing the spread of it, and then there must be all the ones that didn't say anything. That's a movement I can get behind, that's the way to raise awareness. Since then I try to be more aware of the kind of behavior that creates those feelings of unsafeness for women and if I would ever notice something done by others I'd try to step up. The whole man vs bear is terrible at doing the same.

I've been trying to set my head in between these two opinions, the one being "as a man I'm saddened and unhappy to be included in the category where women feel safer with a bear than with me unjustly" and the other being "women have it so bad that this is the reality for them".

In such a case I feel like we have a couple of issues to resolve. The first one being the fact that sexual assault of different levels (not everything is rape or not, there's other ways to suffer it) is definitely a real issue that most women if not all suffer one way or another. The other issue is the fear of all men in consequence of it. This kind of bear/man discussion does two things in my opinion, bring the topic up to a point where it is talked about more openly (which is good) and also perpetuate the fear by generating this constant feel that unknown men equal danger (obviously bad, not only for men, but also removing any possibility of trust from women, one that might be lucky to not have had any sexual assault experience will be afraid of it by default).

This is a problem that we need to resolve together, both men and women of all kinds, the men saying "but I'm not worse than a bear, I would help you get out of the forest without expecting anything in return or attacking you", would need to bring any sexual assault to attention if they notice it, discourage and negate other men (friends or whatever) from wrong behaviors and help women that would need it. Also women should encourage the kind of men that would do that kind of thing, should help bring the gap of trust closer by thanking the men they know and feel safe with. Making a discourse of them against us would only create a bigger division and more sexism and I feel this kind of discourse gets lost when generalizations like this one happen with the bear and the man, despite the fact that it brings up such important issues as the unsafeness women feel with unknown men.

This is not meant to put down the importance of how women feel unsafe, it is by far more important to tackle the sexual assault topics than it is to tackle the fact that I'm considered worse than a bear by women that don't know me. And thinking of that is how I ended up siding more with the person that did the comparison, now, how could we do it in a better way, one that won't automatically move the conversation to "but not all men are bad"?

Edit: I want to point out that I don't mean now women should thank men for making them feel safe, that's like the minimum any person should do with others around, but when it comes to this kind of discussion, acknowledging that there are men trying to do good and not all would jump at the chance of raping someone is a good thing to bring up to avoid losing the importance of the topic by going sideways and off topic.

Yeah he worked in Microsoft before that and when he ended in Nokia the path was quite clear what it would be. But I've had the chance to talk with many engineers that were working at Nokia back in the day and the problems didn't start because of Microsoft.

Basically Nokia had the whole management divided between symbian, maemo, and windows mobile, and as they couldn't agree on a future path all the efforts were divided. Symbian was quite a disaster at the end and it wouldn't have gone far most likely, those that wanted to continue with it didn't have a clear view of the changes coming in the mobile world.

Maemo was great, really advanced, based on Linux, and working really well, maybe too advanced even, specially for your common users back then. The whole system was constantly put down and delayed and the first devices sold wouldn't even work as a phone, only the 4th ended up with mobile connection, which didn't help at all to make it useful (wifi was not as big as it is now) and sold.

Finally there was Windows Mobile which was still starting basically then and had far less strength, but with the support of Microsoft behind it it was easier to push it out. I don't understand why it still has such support when it comes to the UI, I personally never liked it and it felt too simplistic and boring, but the more options the better I guess. Of course once Microsoft managed to plant his own guy inside Nokia they managed to favor the balance towards Win mobile and the other two were left behind more and more.

So Microsoft was a key part in what ended happening but they were not the ones that put Nokia in trouble. That was a lack of direction in the management level.

It's simple and quite short, and I'm not exactly sure why this is the first one that came to mind but here goes anyway https://store.steampowered.com/app/785790/WHAT_THE_GOLF/

There's also the https://goose.game/ which is quite fun and silly.

I'm sure I got more ideas but those were the ones that came into mind without checking.

Edit: realized this is for the deck, not sure if they are confirmed to work but I don't see why they wouldn't.

It seems like a very reasonable policy.

Is there some way to handle setting a contact to have the chance to recover the account in case of someone passing away or being incapable of accessing the account before it is deleted?

Whiskey tho