[chat] died like it lived: pressing unlabeled buttons on its air fryer - Page 25 (2024)

Air fry

This explains so much.

There was always a disconnect when Americans would talk about debit cards, because we have Interac cards and I thought they were the same thing, but they're not. I don't have a "debit card" from my bank. My bank issues me an Interac card, which works at any vendor/store/whatever. I use it to access my bank's ATMs. I can use it on other bank's ATMs, but then there's a fee.

And now they do e-transfers, which is directly from my bank's online portal.

Jesus, I had NO IDEA you guys didn't have Interac.

Jacobkosh wrote: »

Wildlands is a really good game for pew-pew in general. One of my fondest wishes is that someone would just use it as a template for a GI Joe game. All the elements are there, and it would be less problematic.

Why is it still $50?

Feral wrote: »

Aioua wrote: »

Nova quit lording your Canadianness over us

you know us poor Americans don't have government services

Right! Canada.

Yeah, Zelle is filling a niche that really should be a standardized service with government backing

But ours is ACH which is dogsh*t

I don't even know how you'd accept payments with ACH. It always seems terrifying every time I use it. You basically provide your bank details to some third party and you just trust them to take only the money they're owed. And they can directly withdraw whatever they want any time in the future.

Its honestly insane and I would never use ACH for anything but paying money to the government for taxes, paying a utility bill, or paying my credit card.

If a regular business or jesus, a person, asked me for ACH info, I'd flee

Weaver wrote: »

What's a cool game where I can fly a pewpew helicopter?

Nuclear Option has a helicopter that's so pew pew you can shoot down planes with it

There is probably a strong case to be made that plastic cards for point of sale purchases (eg, debit cards) should be a separate service from instant fund transfers (eg, Zelle) and that combining the two is probably a bad thing from a fraud prevention perspective, but I'm not quite sure.

Potato

fun fact:

ACH has no security other than that like, you gotta be semi legitimate as an entity to get access to the system.

Once you have access you can just request draws on any account as long as you have the details. If they don't notice congrats! free money.

Aioua wrote: »

fun fact:

ACH has no security other than that like, you gotta be semi legitimate as an entity to get access to the system.

Once you have access you can just request draws on any account as long as you have the details. If they don't notice congrats! free money.

if they do notice I assume you get thrown off the system really hard and really fast

right anakin

Potato

Donkey Kong wrote: »

Aioua wrote: »

fun fact:

ACH has no security other than that like, you gotta be semi legitimate as an entity to get access to the system.

Once you have access you can just request draws on any account as long as you have the details. If they don't notice congrats! free money.

if they do notice I assume you get thrown off the system really hard and really fast

right anakin

well, depends

if you're clearly a scammer, sure

if you're shady but technically legitimate vendor continually charging people for services they've begged you to cancel, or have some vague "proof" of being authorized to make those withdrawals...

You'd think that with ACH the bank could like, email you and be like, hey Visa corp is requesting $1434 for "autopay credit card payment"

And then you're presented with the option to approve, auto approve, deny, auto deny. Something like this. You know, that would be sane.

vs just f*cking taking your money without notice

Atomika wrote: »

Serious question for our moneybugs like syndalis and SummaryJudgment and you others

Should we not go back to privately owned companies only? Other than funneling money upward to fund the Ortolan Bunting buffet, is there a strong economic argument to not end speculative trading and maintain the status quo that has ravaged our middle class over the last twenty years?

The argument for how shareholding is supposed to work is that, in a state of perfect competition, profits are supposed to go down. They're temporary. Profits happen if a company hits it big with an idea or innovation or opening a new market, but tails off as competition enters the ring, the innovation becomes commonplace, the market gets saturated, public tastes change etc. Shareholders are meant to either be content with the small but stable and steady dividends paid out by a mature company, or take their windfall and go looking for a new big idea to invest in. Which can be very good, because lots of people with good ideas don't have the money to make it happen on their own.

Stability is often undervalued. A fund that puts people's money in a solid blue chip may not be making giant returns but it'll be there when the folks retire.

The big problems, it seems to me, are

- the concentration of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people means there's more money looking for a profitable place to go than there are worthwhile ways to invest it. There are only so many good new ideas at a time - and many markets are so locked up and consolidated that there's no breaking into them anyway. That's how we can have these startups like Uber that string out losses for years and years; maybe it won't pay off, probably it won't pay off, but if it does, it'll be better than getting half a point of interest on a 20-year bond or something.
- absolutely awful MBA and finance education means people in charge legitimately don't know any of this. ^^^^^ They believe in unlimited returns over growth, the equivalent of perpetual motion.
- MBAs are incentivized, not to work for the health of a company, but to loot it for a short-term gain to pad their resume to get hired on at a bigger company to loot.

I think we could probably address these without ending shareholder stakes as a concept by doing things like breaking up monopolies and oligopolies to create movement in their markets again, requiring the regular payment of dividends, cracking down on financial instruments that are basically zero-sum shell games, and hosting a reality show where business majors are hunted for sport.

Potato

Donkey Kong wrote: »

You'd think that with ACH the bank could like, email you and be like, hey Visa corp is requesting $1434 for "autopay credit card payment"

And then you're presented with the option to approve, auto approve, deny, auto deny. Something like this. You know, that would be sane.

vs just f*cking taking your money without notice

but dk

this is also how checks worked, so it must be fine

Potato

Friends, Romans, Countrypeople, I give you Andrew Murray. Finishing out in the Olympics and retiring from professional tennis like an absolute boss.

joshgotro wrote: »

Jacobkosh wrote: »

Wildlands is a really good game for pew-pew in general. One of my fondest wishes is that someone would just use it as a template for a GI Joe game. All the elements are there, and it would be less problematic.

Why is it still $50?

no idea, but it goes down to like ten or fifteen bucks on the regular

Slow cook

Atomika wrote: »

Serious question for our moneybugs like @syndalis and @SummaryJudgment and you others

Should we not go back to privately owned companies only? Other than funneling money upward to fund the Ortolan Bunting buffet, is there a strong economic argument to not end speculative trading and maintain the status quo that has ravaged our middle class over the last twenty years?

Iain Banks had a nice treatment of this idea in one of his non-Culture novels

Regarding privately-owned companies only: My napkin math is if you have a strong social safety net and regulatory apparatus, LLCs are a net good. If you don't, they're a negative, but you're f*cked either way in that case so *shrug*

Re: speculative trading: we don't really know how the tools we've made serve us. Supposedly a ton of that HFT stuff enables market volume, etc., but we're totally divorced at this point in terms of trading stocks that certify x shares in a company, it's entirely imaginary anymore and we're just trading imaginary stock that may or may not have been issued. This is leading to a ton of f*ckiness at the edges as the system gets attacked. There is no or very limited capacity for any meaningful audit of this.

It's probably impossible to design a system that allows for freedoms but cannot be corrupted/infiltrated by bad actors, so my suggestion for successful societies would be to make it a point of yanking that sh*t out root and stem early on

Or appoint me as a benevolent emperor, whatever

Slow cook

Jacobkosh wrote: »

Weaver wrote: »

What's a cool game where I can fly a pewpew helicopter?

Chu and I were reminiscing the other day about Desert Strike and its sequels on the SNES. Besides that, I can only think of open-world games that feature helicopters occasionally, so like GTA, Ghost Recon Wildlands, or Just Cause.

Maybe there's a new milsim game like the old 90s Apache or Hind games but you said "cool game" so...

I was 100% going to reference Desert Strike and its sequels (on the GENESIS)

But I thought surely no one would member

Member those white balls they called bullets?

Donkey Kong wrote: »

Feral wrote: »

Aioua wrote: »

Nova quit lording your Canadianness over us

you know us poor Americans don't have government services

Right! Canada.

Yeah, Zelle is filling a niche that really should be a standardized service with government backing

But ours is ACH which is dogsh*t

I don't even know how you'd accept payments with ACH. It always seems terrifying every time I use it. You basically provide your bank details to some third party and you just trust them to take only the money they're owed. And they can request whatever they want any time in the future.

Its honestly insane and I would never use ACH for anything but paying money to the government for taxes, paying a utility bill, or paying my credit card.

If a regular business or jesus, a person, asked me for ACH info, I'd flee

On one hand, becoming an ACH originator - that is, having authorization to pull funds via ACH - isn't trivial and comes with its own set of legal responsibilities. That includes getting permission from the person being billed and an agreement to only use ACH for transactions of the pre-authorized nature.

OTOH, the ACH protocol itself is really stretching the definition of protocol. It contains no intrinsic standards for authorization, encryption, verification, or error-checking. It's literally just a text file that contains account numbers and transaction amounts, processed on a daily basis by each institution. It's up to the institutions to encrypt and secure the text file.

And it's also up to the institutions to enforce ACH (NACHA) regulations on originators.

Potato

Desert Strike and it's sequels were one of the games that really do play better on the Genesis as it's faster clock speed is more important to that particular play style than the additional graphics modes on the snes.

Slow cook

I f*cking hate how smart y'all are sometimes.

Summs I am jealous of your weird brain.

Same for Donks

Amy, I'm on the fence because you're smarter but we're also drift compatible

Bake

@amateurhour

Punkie Johnson says she’s not coming back to SNL but “there’s no bad blood,” and didn’t elaborate on whose decision it was

I’m kinda on the fence about this. She never really made her mark on the show, but she was consistent and had good timing—a good bench player, and not afraid to play against her natural self.

I think if I were culling for next season, a lot of people would have found the door before her. Most of them, honestly.

Slow cook

amateurhour wrote: »

I f*cking hate how smart y'all are sometimes.

Summs I am jealous of your weird brain.

Same for Donks

Amy, I'm on the fence because you're smarter but we're also drift compatible

I was giggling when I saw your awesome even before I read your post because I'm also just your bud with a wet ass from a soaked motorcycle seat eating at a Waffle House with 'ya

Bake

amateurhour wrote: »

I f*cking hate how smart y'all are sometimes.

Summs I am jealous of your weird brain.

Same for Donks

Amy, I'm on the fence because you're smarter but we're also drift compatible

You don’t want no part of this sh*t brain, Dewey

Sure, it has a lot in it, but it’s infested with the morbs

Jacobkosh wrote: »

Weaver wrote: »

What's a cool game where I can fly a pewpew helicopter?

Chu and I were reminiscing the other day about Desert Strike and its sequels on the SNES. Besides that, I can only think of open-world games that feature helicopters occasionally, so like GTA, Ghost Recon Wildlands, or Just Cause.

Maybe there's a new milsim game like the old 90s Apache or Hind games but you said "cool game" so...

Those were great games, and also, I think, one of the first I remember needing to get a video card upgrade for.

I don't think we were even calling them graphics cards at the time.

SummaryJudgment wrote: »

Atomika wrote: »

Serious question for our moneybugs like @syndalis and @SummaryJudgment and you others

Should we not go back to privately owned companies only? Other than funneling money upward to fund the Ortolan Bunting buffet, is there a strong economic argument to not end speculative trading and maintain the status quo that has ravaged our middle class over the last twenty years?

Iain Banks had a nice treatment of this idea in one of his non-Culture novels

Regarding privately-owned companies only: My napkin math is if you have a strong social safety net and regulatory apparatus, LLCs are a net good. If you don't, they're a negative, but you're f*cked either way in that case so *shrug*

Re: speculative trading: we don't really know how the tools we've made serve us. Supposedly a ton of that HFT stuff enables market volume, etc., but we're totally divorced at this point in terms of trading stocks that certify x shares in a company, it's entirely imaginary anymore and we're just trading imaginary stock that may or may not have been issued. This is leading to a ton of f*ckiness at the edges as the system gets attacked. There is no or very limited capacity for any meaningful audit of this.

It's probably impossible to design a system that allows for freedoms but cannot be corrupted/infiltrated by bad actors, so my suggestion for successful societies would be to make it a point of yanking that sh*t out root and stem early on

Or appoint me as a benevolent emperor, whatever

I would need some seriously uninterested party to tell me that this is true before I believe it. People get so insanely into their fields that they start to buy into all sorts of weird sh*t, and then make artificial lines separating themselves from being the bad guys. I literally just deleted a big draft about occasionally seeing articles from e.g. advertisers with no self awareness unironically declare some type of ad bad and then lament that selfish people are accidentally blocking their very legitimate ads as well.

Potato

In Scotland the money transfer system is called OCH

Slow cook

och means and

Slow cook

Shivahn wrote: »

SummaryJudgment wrote: »

Atomika wrote: »

Serious question for our moneybugs like @syndalis and @SummaryJudgment and you others

Should we not go back to privately owned companies only? Other than funneling money upward to fund the Ortolan Bunting buffet, is there a strong economic argument to not end speculative trading and maintain the status quo that has ravaged our middle class over the last twenty years?

Iain Banks had a nice treatment of this idea in one of his non-Culture novels

Regarding privately-owned companies only: My napkin math is if you have a strong social safety net and regulatory apparatus, LLCs are a net good. If you don't, they're a negative, but you're f*cked either way in that case so *shrug*

Re: speculative trading: we don't really know how the tools we've made serve us. Supposedly a ton of that HFT stuff enables market volume, etc., but we're totally divorced at this point in terms of trading stocks that certify x shares in a company, it's entirely imaginary anymore and we're just trading imaginary stock that may or may not have been issued. This is leading to a ton of f*ckiness at the edges as the system gets attacked. There is no or very limited capacity for any meaningful audit of this.

It's probably impossible to design a system that allows for freedoms but cannot be corrupted/infiltrated by bad actors, so my suggestion for successful societies would be to make it a point of yanking that sh*t out root and stem early on

Or appoint me as a benevolent emperor, whatever

I would need some seriously uninterested party to tell me that this is true before I believe it. People get so insanely into their fields that they start to buy into all sorts of weird sh*t, and then make artificial lines separating themselves from being the bad guys. I literally just deleted a big draft about occasionally seeing articles from e.g. advertisers with no self awareness unironically declare some type of ad bad and then lament that selfish people are accidentally blocking their very legitimate ads as well.

Yeah, to be clear -- I don't think it's true, and even if it was true I don't think it's necessary because of part #2

Like, the entire apparatus of hedge funds setting up server farms in NYC so their copper is 3 milliseconds faster is the craziest/dumbest sh*t

We are entirely divorced from meaningful ownership of public enterprise -- people buy stocks to buy low and sell high, but like, nobody is buying them for the dividends or the fractional ownership stake. It's silly. What does it matter what the companies' financials look like when what you own is only valuable for what someone else would pay for it, not for what nominal value you obtain from the asset itself.

Potato

This blog has some really good articles about how various financial systems work. By a super-nerdy finance+tech guy who (miracle of miracles) is not even remotely a crypto-bro.

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/

SummaryJudgment wrote: »

Shivahn wrote: »

SummaryJudgment wrote: »

Atomika wrote: »

Serious question for our moneybugs like @syndalis and @SummaryJudgment and you others

Should we not go back to privately owned companies only? Other than funneling money upward to fund the Ortolan Bunting buffet, is there a strong economic argument to not end speculative trading and maintain the status quo that has ravaged our middle class over the last twenty years?

Iain Banks had a nice treatment of this idea in one of his non-Culture novels

Regarding privately-owned companies only: My napkin math is if you have a strong social safety net and regulatory apparatus, LLCs are a net good. If you don't, they're a negative, but you're f*cked either way in that case so *shrug*

Re: speculative trading: we don't really know how the tools we've made serve us. Supposedly a ton of that HFT stuff enables market volume, etc., but we're totally divorced at this point in terms of trading stocks that certify x shares in a company, it's entirely imaginary anymore and we're just trading imaginary stock that may or may not have been issued. This is leading to a ton of f*ckiness at the edges as the system gets attacked. There is no or very limited capacity for any meaningful audit of this.

It's probably impossible to design a system that allows for freedoms but cannot be corrupted/infiltrated by bad actors, so my suggestion for successful societies would be to make it a point of yanking that sh*t out root and stem early on

Or appoint me as a benevolent emperor, whatever

I would need some seriously uninterested party to tell me that this is true before I believe it. People get so insanely into their fields that they start to buy into all sorts of weird sh*t, and then make artificial lines separating themselves from being the bad guys. I literally just deleted a big draft about occasionally seeing articles from e.g. advertisers with no self awareness unironically declare some type of ad bad and then lament that selfish people are accidentally blocking their very legitimate ads as well.

Yeah, to be clear -- I don't think it's true, and even if it was true I don't think it's necessary because of part #2

Oh yeah I didn't think you necessarily did, I just had deleted a post on advertisers and SEO types like three minutes prior so I thought I'd jump on that specifically, because it's also a thing I've heard but am... skeptical of.

Regarding corporations:

The idea that shareholder primacy compels corporations to pursue quarterly growth above all other concerns is a cultural notion that happens to serve wall street and company boards of directors. Legally, the US has interpreted shareholder primacy fairly loosely. Shareholder primacy doesn't legally stop corporation from paying their employees more, treating them better, selling more reliable products, or otherwise bring good citizens. But the incentives to do those things are weak: unions, consumer protections, etc.

We also have a concept in the US called piercing the corporate veil where courts or regulators scrutinize a corporation's internal affairs with the intent to punish directors or executives for any malfeasance they discover. US courts have became more reluctant to pierce the corporate veil over the last quarter of the 20th century.

We can easily imagine a state of affairs where corporations are required to uphold the social benefit of the community at large, and where piercing the corporate veil is more common. But we have to figure out how we get to that alternate universe, given that the journey runs upstream against the people in power.

Air fry

I have to be honest: I'm still reeling a little bit by the revelation that Interac is a Canada only thing. They've been ubiquitous my entire (financial) life. Reading a bit about it, looks like it really took off mid nineties, which is when I started working and actually having my own money. So that tracks. The Interac card is also called a "bank card" here, which is probably why when in media I hear "Debit card", I just figured "They mean Interac card".

But they DON'T.

I also didn't know it was a private entity - though it seems to be less evil that the average US Bank. It's a joint venture between our big banks, and it self-polices (Which seems super bad!) but actually forces banks to prove a customer is at fault when fraudulent transactions happen, which seems wild for them, but hoo boy. That whole thing seems just begging for abuse from the big corporate banks, but that doesn't seem to be actually happening.

Potato

oooh new curators corner today with Irving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUxFzh8r384

Potato

Whoever just f*cked up my packige delivery just ate a tier 2 customer complaint via me ripping them one with support because they package dumped(bulk marking a bunch of packages as delivered despite not being at the proper address) and guessing mine is in the package room at the nearby affordable housing tower block. I hate my job but you'll get your packages.

Air fry

I am watching YouTube with my 7 year old niece

This is objectively terrible

Potato

Quid wrote: »

I am watching YouTube with my 7 year old niece

This is objectively terrible

non-logged-in youtube is the worst

enough use of the "not interested in this" button makes it much better if you log in though

Air fry

She has an account. And it's horrible.

Potato

I had a big packij delivery a while ago and it took waaay longer to deliver than it should have. I looked at the app and they'd tried delivering it 3 times and no one was home, but I knew I was home on one of those days.

So I called the delivery company, and they asked for the tracking number and address... and they were sending it to the correct address except the suburb. The suburb was about 3 hours away. They were probably not finding no one home but not finding the street at all because it didn't exist there.

'Oh, do you want us to deliver it to the suburb you live in instead?'

'That would be a good way to deliver my package to me, yes.'

Air fry

"Today we're playing need more poop in Roblox!"

Todays roblox video is heykidskillyourparentsandeathteirnipples featuring seizureinducinglightsandrandompicturesofscrotums

Air fry

This guy is filming his daughter's first date.

What the hell. Just whyyyyyyyyyyy.

in the background are messages in Cyrillic activating Russian sleeper agents