bstix
@bstix@feddit.dk
- Comment on woag 3 days ago:
!lemmysilver
- Comment on America is fucked 6 days ago:
There’s congestion in German cities too. The point isn’t to drive away. During rettungsgasse, nobody goes anywhere. They just make way by stopping to the sides.
The problem in NY is that the cars are too big for the lanes to do that.
- Comment on Anon doesn't understand mirrors 1 week ago:
- Comment on Why didn't *I* think of that? 1 week ago:
Give your nickel to Wikipedia.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_tax
Tl;dr: 6000 BCE in ancient Iraq. It predates money, so they’d pay in whatever they used the land for.
- Comment on Nice try 1 week ago:
If you have kids, try cutting sticks of cucumber and carrots. Serve them in a bowl next to a bowl of candy. See which gets eaten first.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
Unpredictable things happens at that speed.
Forget about braking distance. The reaction time is the difference between life and dying before you even know it.
I know of one example where a motorcyclist killed himself that way. Nobody knows how fast he was going but it’s assumed above 250 km/h, on a regular highway. Down the road is a cross section. A lorry was fully stopped at the crossing and preparing to turn right onto the highway in the same direction as the motorcycle. The lorry driver checked both directions and saw that the road was completely clear as far as the eye could see, hundreds of meters.
A split second later he heard a bump and pulled over to check if he had hit an animal or something. He found a massive hole in the back and the debris from a motorcycle. There was no brake marks or anything indicating that the motorcycle had even attempted to brake or steer around. The theory is that the motorcyclist might have glimpsed at the speedometer or something for long enough that he drove the entire visible distance before being able to even react.
Obviously he was a fault himself, but the point is that at speeds like this, you no longer have any capability to predict what happens next.
If your friend thinks that cool, he might as well play Russian roulette. At least that doesn’t put innocent people in danger.
- Comment on Motorcycle knowledge 2 weeks ago:
!lemmysilver
- Comment on How do you pronounce "centaur" and why? 2 weeks ago:
Hard C and noticeable U: Ken-tower.
- Comment on Anon appreciates Chris Sawyer 4 weeks ago:
I’ve read a lot of stories about it, because I’m a fan of the game and also used to dabble in assembly myself. His motivation isn’t as crazy as it’s often presented.
He used assembly because he had always programmed in assembly on a variety of hardware. He basically had every typical function documented or memorized from other projects. Just as any programmer can remember the statements in a language, he had blocks of assembly code that he could put together to do the same things. Like functions, right? If it’s made right and you know what it does, then you don’t even need to look at what’s between the brackets.
At the time he wrote RCT, he simply couldn’t be bothered to start a new collection of scripts in a different language.
- Comment on Cathy, do the math. 4 weeks ago:
The idea that you’re suggesting is called union busting. It only works in USA and very few sectors in Europe where sector agreements are not mandatory by law.
I’d argue that it also doesn’t work in USA, since the companies end up spending more money on avoiding an agreement than what they’d save on salaries. They also waste a lot of time and resources on the individual bargaining, which provides no value for neither the company or the employee.
If the employers pay people more to not join a union, the union might even say: “Mission achieved without a fight. See ya’ll next time inflation catches up.”
- Comment on Cathy, do the math. 4 weeks ago:
because of pay incentives to leave the union
I believe you missed the part about how the employers negotiate. They don’t. Their union does. A single employer can pay all the money it wants to its own employees to make them quit the union, but the employer is still bound by the agreement that is made on their behalf by all the other companies in the same employer union. They will never be able to agree to pay off an entire sector to do what you suggest, because these companies are competitors. Unlike the businesses that are competing in a race to the bottom by lowering wages, the companies that have union agreements are competing in a race to attract the best employees. It’s not uncommon for businesses to pay more or give better terms than the union agreement describes. That is their edge against their competitors. The only businesses interested in “escaping” the minimum pay are the unsuccesful bottom feeders.
- Comment on Cathy, do the math. 4 weeks ago:
Technically, yes, on paper, they do expire, gets cancelled and renewed every 2-3 years.
In practice, no. They can’t not be renewed. If the employees don’t accept the agreement there will be a strike, and if the employers don’t accept the agreement they can make a lock-out. If the strike or lock-out leads nowhere, and society comes to a halt, the government can sign a law to require the work to resume on previous terms.
The individual employer has no more say in the negotiations than an individual employee. The negotiations happen between the employer union and the employee union.
Keep in mind that some companies actually want to have a union agreement. It’s really only the most unprofessionally run and privately owned companies who believe they can somehow save money from not having an proper agreement with their employees.
Professionel companies focus on making money instead.of wasting resources fighting their own employees.
- Comment on Cathy, do the math. 4 weeks ago:
In my case, even that wouldn’t matter. The only way for an employer to get out of a union agreement is to shut down the business completely.
- Comment on Cathy, do the math. 4 weeks ago:
They can’t cut union rates.
- Comment on The Kermit Cycle 4 weeks ago:
This meme is what happens when rodents eat beans after midnight.
- Comment on Fucking hell 4 weeks ago:
Easy. We often use idioms for comparisons.
One old way would be: “Trump and Hitler are both 2/3 yards from one piece” which means “They’re cut from the same (bad) fabric”.
Fabric was cut in an old measurement"alen" which was 2 foot or 2/3 yards, so simply stating the length would be understood as fabric, similar to how everyone knows that a 2x4s is a piece of wood and such.
- Comment on AI will replace us all... trust me 4 weeks ago:
First one was technically correct. The red ball balances on top of the “white ball with a blue ball on top”.
- Comment on TIL there's appliances to help with waffle stomping, Thanks Google 5 weeks ago:
The real issue is that the drain trap is much smaller for a shower than that in a toilet even if the pipes are the same diameter.
The waffle grid is for the exact purpose of stopping things that are too large for the drain trap, so theoretically it should be fine. If it passes the grid, it can pass the trap. However, the drain trap doesn’t clean out entirely every time. If you stomp shit into the drain, then the trap will contain shit until it is cleaned out. It will also smell like shit, which defeats the purpose of having the trap in the first place.
Drain traps are disgusting enough without the addition of shit. Even in best case, it will accumulate hair mixed with shampoo and conditioner. I doubt that mixing it with shit will generate any kind of water savings, because it will require a thorough cleaning more often. Also, the main pipes actually needs a lot of water to drain. If by saving on water you eventually have to call a plumber to blast out the fat-bergs it will require a whole lot of more water.
- Comment on You guys have to end it 1 month ago:
Grand staff drifting
- Comment on modern psychiatry be like 1 month ago:
If its not the default it’s considered disabled.
Vision is the outlier on this. More people wear glasses than not. This of course goes both ways and in various degrees, but I think the average is slightly nearsighted. It’s easily correctable, so nothing is done to make anything more easily accessible for vision impaired people.
However, neurodiversity is not easily correctable, so perhaps we ought to accept that with the rise in diagnosises that perhaps it’s actually rather normal and adjust our expectations for what people can actually do, instead of calling a majority of people “sick”.
I mean, look at attention disorders like ADHD. They’re perfectly healthy and can do all kinds of stuff. They just can’t do it for 8 hours straight between 9-17… its the expectations that need to change. It’s sick.
- Comment on How much did it cost to create a 10 foot long bike lane 1 month ago:
I got an offer for a similar sized area, which was about €500.
It appears to be a safety measure, so it’s well spent.
- Comment on Why does it seem like many Americans have an arrogant personality trait? 1 month ago:
I think a lot of their culture revolves around adolescence. Sports, music, movies, fashion etc. are based on juvenile traits, where talking, actions and getting attention are more important than more mature things like listening and compromising.
They’re not all like that, but there certainly are many who get through life in an American cultural bubble. When you reach your early twenties you probably think you’ve got everything figured out. That will last until you encounter other cultures that can challenge your views. A lot of Americans don’t encounter other cultures.
I know plenty of Europeans who are similar, but they don’t appear as one group. A German ignorant appears and speaks different than a Swedish ignorant, and both countries are known for having a similar superiority complex based on their own domestic successes. The Americans are in a disadvantage here, since everyone can hear and understand them, and there’s quite a lot of them, so their presence is just a lot more obvious.
- Comment on nets 1 month ago:
Excellent point.
- Comment on nets 1 month ago:
Hmm. Perhaps the beaches shouldn’t be the prioritized focus for developing alternatives to plastic.
If it’s on the beach, it can be picked up. Today, tomorrow or eventually.
I think the plastic that can’t be as easily be collected ought to be replaced by alternatives first.
- Comment on Sun God 1 month ago:
What if all particles are waves. They just temporarily form loops that we consider to have particle behaviour when observed on a larger scale.
- Comment on Stop touching your stuff! 1 month ago:
- Comment on Sooo, where did the blatant Nazism suddenly come from? 1 month ago:
They’re looking for yes-men, who will be loyal to them in even the worst possible situations. Heiling is just a test to weed out anyone else.
Also, the heiling gesture came a little too natural to them.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 month ago:
The CEO isn’t paying that salary. It’s a cost of business. A business you’re paying for as a customer. All the customers pay a percentage of a nickel extra for shopping in a store that has a cart returner on the payroll.
I suppose ithe job pays badly and isn’t very interesting. It’s not something I’d waste my life doing. I wouldn’t want my kids to do it either. Actually I wouldn’t recommend it for anyone. Life has much more to offer than pushing carts all day.
So, congratu-fucking-lations, you’ve created a job that nobody ought to do and made everyone pay for keeping a sorry ass kid on poverty wage.
Ok, so you’d argue that by pushing the cart back, then you’re the one doing the same meaningless job for free. Good point, right?
But here’s the catch: Nobody ever needs to return a cart.
There are at least two ways to do this.
One: We can all accept that the cart doesn’t have a home to be returned to and just leave them wherever and pick them up at the same place. This is obviously the chaotic neutral way.
Two: Pack your groceries in bags in the cart after (or while) paying. When you push the cart back towards the car, you walk by the cart corral, pick up your bags and walk to the car while leaving the cart in the corral. It’s fucking magic.
- Comment on It's why they tried to get rid of it 1 month ago:
He’s missing some punctuation, but the point is that the burden of proof ought to be on the people making the claim instead of as it commonly happens, that people state something wild and then spend their time arguing against the proofs against it. The secondary point is that people who do this are already blind to this, so they are basing their arguments on something that only they believe, and strongly believe without proof.
It makes discussion futile, because the people believing in random stuff are asking for evidence against something untrue that is based on something untrue which is based on something untrue. It’s 2 or more steps away from logic.
I don’t know if that made any more sense, so let’s make an allegory with math.
Let’s say a person wrongly believes that 2=3. This belief is unknown for anyone besides themselves. Based on this, they conclude that 2x3=4 and state that openly. So a sane person would argue that 2x3=6. The first person then claimss that 6 is wrong, and the second person will attempt to prove it logically. It does not matter how much proof the sane person provides of the 6 because the first person does not understand that from their belief. The 2=3 belief is never discussed, only the 6.
- Comment on Respectfully. 1 month ago:
Cock.
