DeceasedPassenger

Good point, I should've considered that.

I'm sorry, but is "dumb bitches" really a slur? It's a nasty insult for sure. Crude and rude. But a slur? Degradation of the value of language.

More than half of six-figure earners said they would have to double their income to feel financially secure. 

“People used to feel when you got to six figures or above that it was a sign of financial stability,” said Libby Rodney, chief strategy officer and futurist at The Harris Poll.

Mr. Rodney is full of shit, whether he knows it or not. There was a study done on the psychology of earning more money than you need to live. There's an interesting phenomenon that arises; people always think they need more to feel secure. $100k feels they need $150k, $400k needs $600k, and this pattern continues all the way up to $15m, on average. I wouldn't be surprised if the peak is even higher nowadays, the study was conducted in the early 2000's I think. I will come back and edit this with more details of said study so I'm not just talking out my ass.

What a sign of the times. God damn I fucking hate this. Some marketing team gleefully jerking themselves off to it somewhere. Their margins on this have got to be disgustingly high.

I would definitely appreciate that, it's been a while but I used to read and share poetry and lyrics with some close friends pretty often. It's been a while.

Understandable, I'd definitely be interested in reading though. Hope things get more manageable for you 🤙

What a fucking dumbass.

Your description sounds more than interesting enough to me, glad to hear you didn't destroy it. Is there somewhere I can view your work? Assuming you want to share.

I believe it's partially because the national debt has always been high and keeps getting higher. It's been a little while since I checked or heard anything about it, but it got a lot of press time in the 2010's. I feel like that affected how americans view debt. I've also heard the financial advice espoused by banks "it's financially healthy to have some debt, it helps you build credit". Which is partially a crock of shit and regardless of the veracity of that statement, it mostly leads to people digging a hole they can't get out of.

I mean yeah, I would answer your statement as "yes". But I would prefer to challenge a fundamental assumption within your question, "suffering is good". Suffering is neither bad nor good, it simply is. Without the experience of suffering, experiences of non-suffering would lose some or all of their meaning. Without winter we cannot appreciate summer, and vice versa.

Agreed, MS and Google are pretty much on the same plane with regards to company ethics.

Makes sense that it becomes a serious trade-off with usability the more a company tries to DIY. The risk aspect is certainly hard to get around. Seems that a solution to this problem would have to be long-term. Any company that has competed with AWS in the past, afaik, has been purchased and absorbed. It would likely require the creation of a nonprofit with a guiding directive to prioritize keeping the organization independent and never being sold. But I've seen that sort of thing fall apart and go off-mission in other industries too.

Considering the above, the only other thing I can think of is a regulating body declaring AWS as a monopoly and forcing them to split. The chances of that happening in the current administration are probably near zero.

Shit sucks, though I appreciate your response.

That's interesting. I have to think more about this but it certainly makes sense, I certainly don't feel 100% pure male based on.. many things. Thank you for explaining.