partial_accumen

If you are in the HR department call your legal department. If you are not in the HR department, call HR.

I have a competing technology that is nearly as accurate. For only $50 I’ll send you this device that you will have unlimited license usage rights to. While not 53% accurate like my competitor, its proven by scientific studies to be 50% accurate. I also offer volume discounts if you buy 10 the price drops to only $45 per device. Sign up now!

You’re mixing other ideas now, muddying the waters if we’re talking about present day events. I’m not arguing about structures of marriage of history long ago. Yes, marriage has historically been a subjection of women where they had few rights and even those usually flowed through the relationship with a wife’s husband. Same sex marriage wasn’t legal in any form back then. I’m not talking about then.

I’m talking about modern marriage. I’m talking about, lets say, the last 50 years. Birth control existed, women could vote and open bank accounts. The Civil Rights act barring discrimination based on sex (1964) being in full effect etc. Further, I’m talking post-Obergefell supreme court where same sex marriage is legal. All of the points I made in my prior post are in reference to modern day marriage.

I immediately clicked on this thread to make a variation on this joke, and you beat me to it by an hour…in a Lemmy retrocomputing community. I knew we’d grow up one day, I just didn’t know this is what it would look like.

We’ve had one global pandemic yes, but what about second global pandemic?

My main point was that the actual reasons for both owning and using guns are not related to the reasoning of the 2nd amendment eventhough it is the law that makes all of this possible. And how could they be related - that reasoning is centuries old and simply nomlonger valid due to the way power is exercised in the 21st century.

I’ll agree with that.

Interestingly, you can hunt or go to a shooting range in most other developed countries and the fact they don’t have an extensive right to bear arms enshrined in their constitution doesn’t seem to be limiting that entertainment value.

Is this true? A very common type of visitor to USA gun ranges are tourists from other developed countries. I wouldn’t expect this if these were equally accessible in other countries.

Culture and ideology are the primary words here, I think. As the epistemological crisis deepens, I fear ideological violence will continue to rise, and guns will be a very combustible ingredient in that dynamic.

I certainly agree this is a real risk. We’ve seen isolated events of this already with teenager Kyle Rittenhouse traveling across state lines to another city to put himself in a position to wield his semi-automatic rifle in a highly charged situation leading to him shooting and killing two people. There was no home defense there, no “well regulated militia”, there was a young man that wanted to be in a probable place where circumstances would arise he’d shoot someone and be protected by the law.

Thats a bit different. There isn’t a mandate to do those things which is where OP was going. Many private companies may engage in the same behavior but there isn’t a legal requirement they do so. There are companies that don’t just look one quarter ahead and run their businesses for the long term customer satisfaction. I’ll admit they are getting more rare though.

Thats certainly possible, but there’s no legal requirement they do so. With publicly traded companies the CEOs have a legal fiduciary responsibility to increase shareholder value.

I think you’ve got it a bit backwards. Those things aren’t written into law to make marriage more attractive, marriage is just an easy litmus test that you like your partner enough that you’d want them to have those things. As I said, the State will let you replicate a number of those things with legal instruments, but the State also says, if you trust this person enough to be legally bound to them (and responsible for their marital debts too) then we know you would also trust them with these other things so you get them without asking for them.

I’m a vegan and love fake meat, I love tofu, I love seitan, I love beyond burger, I love mountains of veggies. I love bean burgers, veggie burgers, pakora, etc.

I’m an omnivore and love all of that too. I’d add tempeh and many mushrooms to that list too.

I do not like cauliflower in any other form than in its OG form, lmao…

Cauliflower leans closer to its cousin, cabbage. Its really easy to mess up cauliflower and make it taste and smell horrible.

I finally figured out how to really enjoy cauliflower rice, as a replacement in “fried rice”. You’ve got to get a lot of the water out of it first, then go high heat with a fat. I use butter, but you might be able to get away with avocado oil to stay vegan. Get that maillard reaction going so it browns up just a bit, add some soy sauce, add some diced veggies, and I throw in a scrambled egg I cooked earlier.

Is it identical to actual rice “fried rice”? No, but its close enough for me and is extremely cheap as far as calories go, about 90-120 calories per serving instead of 340 calories or so for actual fried rise. Cauliflower fried rice is also very on low carbs so its friendly to keto folks. Lastly, its also gluten free for our Celiac friends.

Every now and then Chipotle will have Cauliflower rice and it works pretty well with Mexican dishes too.

There’s some technical pieces I’m missing about the European implementation. Do you have a link to the system you’re looking at or the name? I’m happy to learn more.

I’m a bit proponent of solar. Get it in whatever form you can. Balcony solar is a great concept, so if thats what’s available to you, I’d say go for it. As for grid stability, you’re one person. You have no ability to affect operations at the grid level. The regulators in your region will have to account for people like you and your electricity needs and put in place solutions for future stability.

Any reduction in electricity from fossil fuels is a win. Get solar.

Theres a few pretty critical things you get with marriage that you simply can’t with long term committed dating (in the USA at least). Such as:

• being the legal authority over health decisions for your incapacitated partner
• smooth transfer of assets upon death of one partner to the other
• legal protection from one partner being compelled to testify against the other
• certain insurance benefits only apply to married partners

You can get some of these things or versions of them with complicated legal instruments like Medical PoA and trusts, but many times they are a pale imitation and some things simply have no replacement. If you’ve decided to make your life with your partner these are important.

CEOs are mandated by law to increase shareholder value as much as possible

One slight correction, this applies to publicly traded companies that appear on stock markets, yes. This isn’t a requirement in privately held companies.

Its not in place yet. I’m seeing it take shape. I don’t see how it can be successful on its own and will either lead to user teams adding their own Shadow IT or the skeleton IT Operations group balloon into a giant Shared Services outfit.

However, I thought I’d mention it as its the same mindset that lead to Devops, which was just a business reaction to finding a way to hire and maintain fewer IT roles. Its interesting to see the IT roles being pushed directly onto the users now.

If your users are external to the org then this probably doesn’t apply. However, if your users are internal, you give them a repo of their own and grant them access to publish to the pipeline.

Devops for sure. (“Why have IT people when we can just make developers do it?” Fucking brilliant ☹️)

I’m not sure if you’re tracking Enterprise IT trends these days, but its evolving yet again with “Why have Devops people when we can just make the USERS do it?”

Suffice to say, those of us that know how to clean up messes (or realistically become Shadow IT) will have gainful employment for the foreseeable future.

I get why you say that, but keep reading the thread for the discussion as to why I shouldn’t (and am not going to).

instead of big solar farm, it’s more € 4 000 system with a bit more than a 1.5 KW of balcony solar,

…and…

It cannot allow for off-the-grid living but it does keep the grid safe and decentralizes energy generation. With the possibility of a call to share in case there is a catastrophic event.

Those do the opposite actually. Those are some of the small scale versions of the problem that @ms_lane@lemmy.world was referring to.

Those are “grid following” devices. So where they can contribute to a cascade failure is if there is a slight sag in the grid voltage or frequency (supplied by the “big spinny things” of utility grade generators that poster was referring to), the solar system would turn itself off to protect itself. This would enable full passthrough of your households electrical demand to pull from the grid directly instead. Where the balcony solar would be offsetting a nice chunk of demand, suddenly that demand is pulled from the grid instead in a fraction of a second. Now imagine ALL the houses doing that at once. The sudden spike in demand from all those households can cause utility grade solar/wind operators to pull their supply as well, further spiking the need for more electricity at that moment. Then you get brownouts or blackouts because the only supply of electricity was the grid scale generator with the big spinny generators (which form the grid), and the demand is beyond the ability of the generator to supply. So breakers are thrown cutting off electricity customers to protect the electrical infrastructure.

Because balcony solar are “grid following”, they cannot be called on to share in the case of a catastrophic event. They need a healthy grid in place before they can come online.

and decentralizes energy generation.

This point is true though during the good times. Any reduction in grid demand (which these balcony solar setups do) is a net positive. However, they don’t help in catastrophic situations because they depend on the grid being up and healthy. I wish more of the world allowed them. We aren’t allowed to do that in the USA, as an example. Putting up any amount of solar that connects to the grid at all, even solar that doesn’t feed power back (called “zero export” here) require detailed engineering plans and permits before you can install them. This increases the cost and complexity for any residential solar installation.

Pease tell me you know of someone where this actually was true:

I know many personally that earned this kind of money.

that they made crazy money and they’re set for life.

Yes, but only for some of those because most chose lifestyle increases instead of savings. So I know tens of the folks that can retire right now and have more than twice the median income of the USA for their entire life without running out of money. This means they’d have a couple million in the bank. This would be an annual retirement income of about $80k-$90k/year USD for one person (thats also without any Social Security benefit added on top yet). Many times a married couple both work in tech so that would be household retirement income of $160k-$180k/year for as long as they live (again I’m not even adding in Social Security benefits in this yet) if they chose to retire early. These folks have another 7 to 15 years in the workforce if they choose to retire in their mid 60s.

Thats not “chartering jets to Monaco” money, but its a very comfortable retirement. That was realistically attainable for lots and lots of people in tech after working for 15-25 years.

Because, based on 30 years in and a complete lack of knowledge of anyone who got out and retired early, either personally and via someone I know,

There were lots of IT jobs that paid decently (not amazingly) and if you worked for that one company for 20 years you would NOT have the money I’m talking about. To get this in IT required chasing newer technologies (or sometimes chasing specific older ones), and changing jobs frequently, usually every year or two but sometimes as short as only a few months. The trick is (which took me longer to figure out than I’d like to admit) that corporate annual raises were minuscule. You’d work your ass off for maybe a 2%-5% raise each year. Whereas if you did the exact same work and effort and changed jobs your new employer would give you essentially as low as 15% and sometimes as high as 400% salary increases in a year. You can quickly imagine that you only have to do this a handful of times for your annual salary to be huge. Think about how long it would take you to have a million dollars if you were making $180k to $400k and invest that savings ten years ago.

I know many one that has actually chosen to retire early even though many have the funds to do so. When you’re at the end, you’re at your peak earning phase. So working just a few more years means massive increases in retirement income. This is the bit of a trap that keeps you working voluntarily. Sometimes retirement gets forced early with RIF/redundancy/layoffs in your 60s and you may not be able to get another tech job however.

The even more risky path if you want the many multimillionaire path, is you started your own business. High risk of failure, especially tech types that don’t know the business side, but for those that have the right partners/help and can thread the needle, this is the tech path to the tens of millions of dollars of wealth.

I conclude the only people for whom this worked were C-level. Even the smartest man I know didn’t cash in and get out.

I’m talking all non-C level here, just technologists/individual contributors. At most they might be project or tech leads, but they’re still not executives. I don’t know the executive C-level advancement track so I can’t speak to it. Maybe the folks you know were the ones Doctorow was talking about. If the smartest man you know didn’t know to trade up or cash out, then maybe he was one that was in it for “vocational awe”. Do you have any knowledge as to why he didn’t trade up or cash out?