apsurd

nerd-sniped me on this one. mainstream cool isn’t a thing. i think you mean successful. mainstream values success because it’s the vanilla proxy for a vanilla form of “value”.

so cool has always been about the “iykyk” kinda value. once too many people know there’s nothing to know anymore.

I've been happy with fastmail. Their product and UX looks a little dated even - in a good way I realize. It's not trying to be anything its not.

Also iCloud paid accounts allow custom domains for email. The Apple mail product is way worse but it was amazingly simple to set up and I am happy I have my own domain.

I feel like I got lucky in choosing fastmail. They are always compared. Fastmail gave me a better impression. Maybe there's something to that instinct.

damn, this guy crashing out live in front of his company and the (tech) world.

AI times are weird. Validates that truism I heard: money (and power and influence and now AI) is an amplifier. It amplifies what you always were.

The baseline premise that it’s more expensive is wrong. It can be as it’s a very big marketplace. But your entire stance is based on this static absolute that the cost is premium and that’s a wrong assumption.

Different people like different things at different times.

what does that even mean?

you’re bragging about being above mcdonalds. on an internet forum.

chill

synchronous vs asynchronous entertainment.

I took the advice as to remove the stress and pressure of assuming kids need synchronous attention to stay entertained. They sure will want it. resist.

but then no one can say anything to anyone about anything.

its ok to say what you mean and have it land in different ways for different people.

Is that not reasonable? The cost on society is a measure of justice.

Good framing. its a better way to convey that crime isn’t simply solved by punishing the “bad” people.

what do you mean when you say the $500 is for what they were caught doing not the total damage caused?

Do you mean like $500 may be the estimate of repair but living in a heavily graffitied neighborhood lowers property values? so net damage is way more?

What? after reading your first sentence many times it’s basically saying you’re of the mind that a criminal very likely has way more crimes that we’ve just haven’t seen so they should be prosecuted heavily for the one we did see just to make sure we get our prosecution-bang for the buck?

Doesn’t that prove actually that the act of theft is not some calculated needs based negotiation in need of “the right threshold” to deter crime?

Like fare hopping, first half of my life i thought how unfair that i have to drone away as a tool of society and pay like a shmuck meanwhile these freeloaders have happily escaped the matrix.

second half of life i realized being unwilling or unable to pay $2.50 for public transist is an issue between that person and their life situation. If that’s what they need, I support the subsidy.