binsh

This is the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The only nothingness here is your understanding.

It always comes back to capital, sure. Technically your ISP could disappear tomorrow, or your region's power could go out. _Then what?_ There's always some bit of internet infrastructure you don't own or that necessitates money. But infrastructure is different. As long as you pay (and aren't doing anything particularly illegal), your server will probably continue to exist. And if not, you just buy or rent a computer in a different data center, or even set up a server on a spare computer at home. But you're much less likely to have your hosting provider pull sketchy Medium-style nonsense than, well, Medium.

What is your problem with the USPS? You've been refuted several times in this thread, but you keep repeating blatant falsehoods.

It sounds like you personally have a beef with your mail carrier(s) and/or your local post office. Which is fine, but that doesn't mean the entire system is broken. My experience has been overwhelmingly positive, and it's a little selfish of you to celebrate the destruction of a government program that a lot of people who don't make FAANG salaries depend on for medication and bill paying. Seriously, where is the compassion?

This is the critical piece. It's provided as a government service to absolutely _everyone_, for a low price. Like you said, the fact that you can send a letter to any US state or territory for the same price, and it gets there in a few days, is a miracle, and arguably one of the remaining functioning bits of American government. What happens to people in small towns who rely on the mail for prescriptions? Or important paperwork? "Sorry, ma'am, but since the post office was privatized, we'll need an extra $30 to deliver your insulin. But if you subscribe to our Super Shipper Preferred program, you can save 10%..." Imagine losing all connection to the outside world because your city wasn't deemed profitable enough. That's some Gilded Age hell right there.

I think this is healthy and actually comports with reality. Driving _is_ dangerous, and a lot of people do it really badly. I see way too many people on their phones on the highway to ever feel safe driving.

It's not like trying to find the Fountain of Youth or something. It's a company with billions of dollars making it impossible for certain people with disabilities to access the Internet. Let's not pretend that it just has to be this way. A world where half the Internet can't be broken by one company should be the baseline.

> "We are winding [the promotion] down early. There is the impression we don't like among our consumers that there is a problem with the promotion."

Do they teach this in marketing school or do you pick up this kind of passive, responsibility-avoidance on the job?

Definitely would like a source for this because I feel like I hear it a lot and I don't believe it's true.

You can be talented and not care what you work on. And if all you care about is what tech is new and shiny, how talented can you be? I don't want you rewriting my product every year so you can use the next framework du jour.

Maybe talent means something else when nothing is at stake, but I'd argue that a talented engineer knows that when a product works and makes money, and the tech stack isn't prohibitive of those goals, it doesn't really matter what it's written in. In fact, I see trend-chasing developers as liabilities, because they're the ones who will replace everything every six months while you bleed money.