Correct as all the negative comments may be, I really think we can’t know what shape it would take. Things change quickly when people get hungry. Only class consciousness can save us.

Also this fun old video.

How about the release broken game then finish the game way after release… if you’re lucky mechanic?

Yes. Gtfo here with that. Infuriating.

I don’t know why, but the King Zora Sliding scene has probably stuck with me the most. Not for being annoying or amazing, but because it has been the memory my brain has used to understand so many situations in life. Like the just impossible to avoid, watching paint dry boredom that infects so much of life.

No. You’re the only one I see implying there are no cases where data is private outside a VPN. Strictly speaking, if you need only the data across a connection to be private TLS is sufficient. Who is implying that is a complete threat model. You are building more and more strawmen against which to argue, but it really just sounds silly. I’m a professional that has been in the industry for decades, so your dick waving contest just doesn’t move me.

Yes, a more complete risk analysis in many cases may show that you’d like the host one is reaching to also be private, but nobody is saying such a situation doesn’t exist; you’re barking at the moon.

Are you saying TLS doesn’t make the data that traverses a connection private? If so, I think we’ve discovered the deficiency in your viewpoint.

e: missed a word

They didn’t say they don’t value privacy; a bit of a strawman. Most connections are private even if not anonymous. TLS is sufficient for many uses. Knowing this allows one to be discerning about when a VPN is more useful.

Actually maybe I misread your intent. On second glance, looks like you might be yes-and’ing.

ducaale/xh is another much like curl. Closer to postman are Hoppscotch and Insomnia.

Say hello to the elves for me.

If tomorrow’s wealth will exceed that cap, I’d like to see today’s priority be offload that money at all cost. That’s really all I’m suggesting with a partly tongue in cheek suggestion of making it scary to cross that line. But the point is simply to make a person approaching that line feel that getting rid of money with a quickness is integral to their wellbeing.

I’m saying it isn’t a class of people that is not of their own volition. It could be looked at as similar to choosing the class of rapist or other criminal. By choosing to allow your wealth to exceed this point, society has deemed you to be in violation of the law; due process intact. You are therefore, no longer protected by the police, fire departments, emergency rooms, etc. It is one of the primary roles of society to determine what is acceptable and what is not.

I get that, but I don’t think they deserve the same protections as the vulnerable. The vulnerable cannot easily change their situation. The wealthy can. Beyond that, their cost to society is much much worse.

Now that doesn’t surprise me a bit. Many people struggle with curves and the intuition of growth systems.

The golden age of having to hear from stupid people.

Sure I’m in probably a few. But I also think I’m old and decently read. And I haven’t encountered people that think billionaires got this money from salary.

Even simpler. If one’s wealth exceeds some function of GDP, the law no longer protects them.

Is it? This is the first I’m encountering that idea. I think most are aware it happens via gains in other ways.

It is quite good. It has good readout voices and offers idiomatic alternative translations. Also has good bookmarklets.

Power Slippers? Red Shoes for sure.