And as such is how the beat goes, decade after decade. It will never change, it has been a rinse and repeat for ages, both at the federal and provincial levels.

While I think these companies should definitely be regulated, I’m not sure how feasible or sustainable it is to nationalize them. It might curtail competition from fostering, if people who are responsible for introducing disruptive companies are less incentivized from creating companies.

As much as I’m not a fan and I’m highly critical of Musk, one can’t deny the disruptive impact his companies have had on the industries, and him forcing traditional car manufacturers to innovate. If his companies get nationalized, would that discourage others from creating potentially positively disruptive companies that would force existing industries to innovate?

What kind of research necessitates killing whales??

If he’s doing this for profit, there has to be a consumer… Who are the consumers and what are they buying?

I wish the world was as utopian as you described. Unfortunately, and I’m sorry to say, that’s an extremely naive world view you hold. I hope you won’t be taken advantage of by people with less good intentions.

Do you not have multiple confluence space admins to avoid specifically this type of problem?

Are we playing Jeopardy?

Then you know full well that just because they shouldn’t take all the crab legs doesn’t mean they don’t/won’t take them all. If I go for crab legs and none are available, I’ll blame Mandarin and give them a crappy review. People will be people. Can’t blame them.

Then why advertise it as “unlimited” or “all you can eat”? That’s false advertisement.

You’re referring to Mandarin Buffet aren’t you

What? How? The user is simply taking advantage of what is being offered

In what world are “unlimited” and “all you can eat” synonymous with “too far”?

“Too far” implies a definite limit, which is the antonym of unlimited and all you can eat, regardless of the business’s ability to sustain it. If there is a limit, don’t advertise it as unlimited or all you can eat that’s false advertisement.

Lmao what’s with the salty tone lol

I would categorize it more as wear and tear rather than disposability, but I do agree that the nature of repairing a MacBook is only for a market that can afford it. It’s much like repairing a car, either you continue repairing it, or you drive it to the ground and buy a new one.

As a software developer, I personally do find MacBooks to be more conducive to my profession (my current MacBook is approaching 10 years), so while I wouldn’t say I agree with “more people need to leave it”, I would say that we as customers should pick the product that suits our needs the most (apple or otherwise). Which I believe is the original message in your comment (get the product that you can afford and are in the market for).

The root of the issue was identified by a third party repair shop, narrowing down to two capacitors that were providing the wrong voltage, preventing the MacBook Air to boot up.

While I agree that a repair shop technician is certainly more technically skilled and trained to find those issues than an apple genius bar associate, it is up to Apple to ensure that they equip their associates with the right tools and processes to identify the root cause prior to providing a quote, and even more so to inform the customer prior to performing the work order, or charging the customer.

Coincidentally, I just came back from a battery swap of my MacBook, and in my experience, there was confirmation at every step of the way before proceeding, even down to email receipts, to ensure that I understand the problem, and approve the work order. In this lady’s case, someone fucked up big time.

What? At the time of this comment, one comment is a link to piped YouTube, one comment about the dispersible nature of Adobe products, and another about the difficulty of electronics repair… Where are these Apple cult members or are you really just hallucinating?

I’m not an expert or anything, but as it has been explained to me, the geo-political consequences of Ukraine having NATO weapons is enormous… If Ukraine were to have access to F-18s, F-35s, or any NATO asset, it would implicate NATO, and further escalate the conflict towards a NATO-Russian war (World War 3), and the precipitation of nuclear assets. This is why even France’s own Dassault assets and Sweden’s Saabs were not offered. F-16s are old enough, and used enough by non-NATO forces that this might be okay.

A prolonged war, while incredibly tragic, might still be less costly than World War 3…

Damn, those drones sitting in the audience clapping is equally disgusting.

As a manager who WFH, if managers are ineffective at their job, it’s either that they suck, or their org structure causes them to suck.

If upper management wants a manager to manage 30 people, of course they will suck.

Keep the team to 8 max so the manager can actually do some hands on technical work as well.

As a manager, I can confirm that productivity drops in the office (even my own). I’ve got team members that choose to go to the office (moreso than me). I encourage them to work however they prefer, and want. You can work anywhere around the world however you wish, including at some nice beach, as long as it doesn’t affect the project.