Jcampuzano2

Prefacing this by saying it may sound insensitive but from my experience shopping and getting things to eat used to be things people would do with their children and was part of growing up and learning what adults do.

In my opinion this scenario may actually end up promoting unhealthy habits for your children which is what these companies want.

This is a question that's going to sound stupid and maybe insensitive, but that aside - how do you think people managed to do this in your exact same scenario for the last 50+ years without having a service like this?

Our own parents went through this exact scenario that you mentioned plenty of times before any of this even existed without having the to pay the $10 fee.

I don't really understand how the personal economics for this work out for the majority of the population.

You'll always get some people who argue that time is money and that the saved time that people have from ordering from these services is an opportunity cost. But the reality is I'd wager that for probably 99% of the population, this is actually not true and the economics doesn't work out favorably after accounting for all the fees.

So then, all that is really left is convenience. And personally, I don't really find it that convenient at all. Often times the time it takes for an order to land on your doorstep is meaningfully longer than it would have taken for you to drive to the store and pick it up yourself.

In other words - these services really just profit off of laziness. And the sad part is I think we're just promoting a lazy society overall with lots of the newer services being offered.

I'm honestly curious. What line do you think the left crossed first? There is nothing in my mind that comes even close to the lines that have been crossed by this administration.

Just that line alone makes me think you're far less centrist than you claim to be.

And interestingly enough, the last place I would ever want to get a burger nowadays is McDonald's.

This is why I said "repeatedly" i.e. a pattern has already emerged.

And in most companies I've worked at you are the one being held responsible for a PR/feature not being merged or finished on time - at least in my experience. You're often working on a different team from the people doing reviews, so in a large enough company they are just a faceless/nameless person from the perspective of your PM.

Not gonna lie, I've had the PR issue before.

The solution? Blast the PR into your shared slack noting that it isn't being reviewed on time because maybe XYZ person is busy.

Watch how fast they are suddenly free to review when their name is attached to something in public.

The real solution is to simply fire these people. There is no good excuse for ignoring requests repeatedly besides laziness or self importance.

> Harpe accepted responsibility for sharing her credentials but argued that firing her was excessive.

> In her appeal, Harpe said her husband was a certified federal law enforcement officer and that every search was conducted for law enforcement purposes.

> “The violation occurred because I gave my husband, who is a certified law enforcement officer with the Department of Homeland Security, access to my Flock account,” Harpe wrote. “Every search he conducted was for law enforcement use only and not for personal gain.”

There seems to be a subset of law enforcement officers who fundamentally don't understand privacy, checks and balances, and responsibility. They believe they should have unrestricted access to everyone else and that they are above us all.

Firing her was not excessive, it is the bare minimum. Officers should be held to a higher standard, not lower. She and her husband should be in a jail cell.

This is expected. A lot of these companies that are closing their doors make a large portion of their revenue based off of ads and upsells which agents can easily be instructed to ignore, and don't interact with like a human.

Another more blunt way to say it is that people can instruct their agents to look out for their best interests (and while there are cracks they continue to get better at this), and companies hate that.

People will work around it similar to how we've worked around with adblockers for years, and it will just become a game of attrition as these companies work to preserve their moats until they find a way to preserve this revenue stream off of people's agents.

Combined, their companies have broken basically every law in the book that you could when it comes to privacy and copyright.

"It belongs to all of us"

For the low entry fee of ~$200 a month you too can escape the permanent underclass - which is more than some countries average citizen makes in an entire year.

Oftentimes I'm buying maybe a tool or a part or something like that which isn't necessarily available in my local hardware store.

Having a predictable delivery date for that on top of it most of the time being way faster than anywhere else is really nice. If I buy some of these somewhere else I might wait weeks for a small part due to logistics issues or low availability compared to Amazon

Not all purchases are things that are just consumable/materialistic. I find most of the time the stuff I buy on Amazon nowadays are things like this, where I want something I need but can't easily get locally or am too busy to go out and get during stores hours.

At this points its an IQ test. Stupid people still google exactly what heinous stuff they plan to do and think thats gonna fly.