So now there is two obnoxious people blaring sound? If you didn't have the courage to speak up, how are you going to have the courage to disrupt them and others?
The fact that this occurred in Bombay is important context. In India, the culture amongst older people is to have a clear sense of where you fit in the hierarchy. You might be verbally abusive to those who you consider below you, but you will remain silent and deferent to those who are considered economically/socially superior. This manifests as a certain class of people who have never been called out on any of their obnoxious behavior, because their economic/social status has shielded them from criticism for their entire lives. Meanwhile a majority of society is perfectly accustomed to being verbally abused, to the point where someone like me saying "please" and "thank you" makes it clear that I am of the Indian diaspora.
By the way, I've noticed that the younger crowd in India leans much more toward egalitarianism and tends to reject bizarre social constructs like caste. The fact that a young guy also thought of this solution speaks to their ingenuity as well.
Think it through just a tiny bit more. It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way. Therefore it’s less likely the other individual will confront you back, or perhaps more importantly it would make them look more unreasonable for doing so.
Social pressure is a real thing and it affects both behaviour and outcomes, it’d be silly to ignore that.
> It’s more socially acceptable to be angry back at someone who is confronting you directly than someone who may or may not be making an example of you but in a passive way.
I actually agree with this. And similarly, I'd argue that it's more socially acceptable to use this audio repeater than to "nicely" confront someone who is so brazenly violating social norms.
The people who react angrily to someone asking them to keep their noise down are very likely the same people who react angrily to someone interrupting their call or entertainment with loud noises, especially noises that just repeat what they're saying or watching. I agree social pressure is a real thing, but if you don't have the courage to ask them to kindly keep the volume down, how would you have the courage to do this?
These questions have pretty straightforward answers. No, the first one isn’t a reasonable assumption because people react VERY differently to passive vs direct action. This isn’t controversial. As for your second one, easy, because one takes less “courage” than the other.
I also disagree with the entire premise that it’s about courage in the first place. You can have the courage but decide the other method simply has less downsides. No need to pretend otherwise.
You don't have to figure out what to say back to the person. It is hearing their own self that makes them want to STFU. Apparently hearing their voice is just as annoying to them as it is to us?
Does it really take "courage" to speak up in cases like this? If anything, it's just as insulting to point out to an adult that playing loud audio in a crowded public place is inappropriate, as if they didn't know that!
Yes, it does take courage, the person doing it is likely to react poorly and it could easily escalate into a physical altercation.
for me, the worst offenders are men watching sports on public transportation or restaurants. I hate it, but I think different cultures have different norms.
It takes a bit of experience and tact. Saying "excuse me, would you mind turning down your phone a bit, please" as an opening request would not likely be confrontational especially in someplace like an airport. Few people are going to be itchy to start a fight over something like that in a place full of cameras, witnesses, security people, and with fairly limited exits.
It can create an awkward situation which a lot of people are averse to. For example, I wouldn't speak up on other forms of public transport, but in airports in particular I go on a warpath.
Always gave a sensible chuckle to his comics. One of my favorite scenes from the show was about "The Knack". My dad originally shared this with me, reminding me that I'm "cursed" for inheriting the knack from him.
To me that is not a problem, it is the reality of stuffing people together who have no other bond than it is their place of work. The problem is the system, not the people.
I found out that there's a backlog of content going back over 100 years (a lot of it at the public library) and have been happily consuming that for about 6 or 7 years now.
(I still have about 4 decades to go to catch up with today—which will probably take me another 3 years or so).
That's my thinking. I get the argument for "reduced competition" but Netflix and HBO aren't competitors. They are just two companies in the same line of business, but with different production lines.
I do wonder what it will do for their sports deals. HBO have had the rights to a lot of sports, including Tour de France and the olympics and is the only way to get EuroSport, as well as a number of TV channels, including some country specific ones.
You don't see reduced competiton? HBO Max and Netflix are director competitors, post acqusition Netflix no longer had to compete hard with shows like Succession. The expanded catalog makes it even harder for smaller streamers to compete.
On sports rights Netflix no longer has to bid and compete with HBO, and same story having a bigger live sport inventory.
This is not unlike consolidation of food distributors where the end up wielding strong pricing power, farmers have fewer options to sell to and restaurants have few options to buy from. The middleman profits.
I disagree. Spotify and YouTube Music are competitors, because I can switch freely between them, and expect more or less the same catalog. HBO and Netflix are supplementary and many will just get both, because switching from one to the other makes no sense. For example I can't watch Star Trek on HBO and the rights deals made with the studios ensure that I'll never be able to watch it one both.
Assuming that Netflix, Disney, Paramount and HBO where competing, then why aren't pricing at rock bottom? There's zero competition and removing HBO won't change a damn thing, other than removing one subscription for a large number of people (potentially).
Never heard of needing to open a PDF in sandbox mode, but it makes sense cause of potential malicious content so I looked up if Chrome does it by default with it's viewer. It does, as does Firefox and Safari so that covers most browsers.
PDF in the spec contains an insane amount of stuff which could be exploited. But every reader other than the Adobe one leaves out most of the spec.
So I wouldn't be that worried about opening a random PDF in a browser. But I would be maybe worried about opening one in a desktop app written in an unsafe language.
We finally reached critical mass on seeing money as an arbitrary construct, so now we're converting it into real, physics-based heat. Entropy at its finest.
I've been saying roughly the same thing about cryptocurrencies (just a good way to waste fuckhuge amounts of resources on digital tulips to enable crime) but it never seems to stop anyone from plowing ahead on being stupid.
Water is one I really don't get, if anyone would be willing to explain it to me. Is it because of manufacturing? We already have these manufacturing plants, it's not like more are being started, that process takes years to decades. Hell intel couldn't even finish the few they were working on. Because of concrete for datacenters? I'm sure developing countries are using significantly more of that to build houses, so much so that it completely eclipses the one-to-two datacenters you might see built in the next 5 years in your area. Power generation? That water goes straight back to the atmosphere.. water cycle, even on the open loops, water becomes steam which becomes rain..
And the water is being pumped out of aquifers that aren't being refilled. That water took thousands if not millions of years to get there. Once gone, the aquifers collapse and cannot be replaced as the space once taken up by the water is now just ground.
The issue is that they need fresh water for evaporative cooling.
Much of the world experiences fresh water scarcity, so it's not the best ethics to divert this resource from people in need to tech of uncertain value.
Check out the impact xAI is having on environment and health in Memphis if you want to go further down the rabbit hole.
Maybe people shouldn't be building data centers in deserts. In the city of Toronto the Deep Lake Water Cooling System uses water taken from Lake Ontario used for drinking water to cool a number of buildings. Most notably 151 Front Street West which houses the data centers routing most of the Internet in Ontario.
Assuming it's capable of running in your browser, I'd suggest using chrome's dev profiling tools to help with finding the optimization areas. Based on feedback from everyone else, sounds like something is not cleaning up as the game keeps running.
Years ago I worked in customer service. There was this guy who came in to to motivate us. He talked about the work of someone named Bob Farrell who had a chain of ice cream shops and sold burgers. He had received a letter from a disappointed customer. The customer had been given the extra pickles on his burgers for years and now one of Bob's employees told him he now had to pay extra for it. The customer said he'd never come back. Bob could have said "what an entitled idiot" and kept charging for pickles but he took that letter as a calling for how you should treat customers - just give 'em the pickle. It costs you next to nothing to give the customer the pickle and it makes them happy.
Minio doesn't have to give non-paying users anything, but the story still applies. Give them the pickle. It costs nothing in the grand scheme of things, and if it does, ask for donations like any open source project would do to cover your costs. But as others have pointed out, Minio is not an open source company, they are a commercial company that has source available.
> Minio doesn't have to give non-paying users anything, but the story still applies.
How on earth does it apply when your complete example story relies on the satisfaction of the paying customers. If you're not paying, you're not a customer - you're a user.
> If you're not paying, you're not a customer - you're a user.
This doesn't work with open-source projects: someone can still provide a lot of value to you without explicitly paying for it. If a community member volunteers a lot of their time to contribute code or provide support to other users, then you probably shouldn't piss them off either.
They/we certainly do (we are using MinIO as well). But they are NOT paying customer, nor do they pay something back (at least most of us dont), so they should not really feel entitled to the "value" that they were getting for free.
The modern hippocratic oath has no mention of poisons, also doesn't require the oath to be sworn before the gods of the pantheon. Up until the 19th century, physicians didn't believe in germs either. Attitudes change with the knowledge we accumulate.
reply