This will come as a shock to you for sure: Most people aren't interested in photography. To most people that are, it's not even work, it's just a hobby. I'm sure you loved focusing on the color saturation and depth of field effects in all of Apple's ads, but most people don't even notice or care. All we see in them are a bunch of pretentious hipster douchebags that think macs don't get viruses just because their ad said so.

Insurance is priced on risk, if you live in hurricane alley, you're going to pay more, ditto if you have a bad driving record. Would you find it fairer if they weren't allowed to surcharge for DWIs and we all got to pay higher rates?

There's a lot the insurance industry does that I think is BS but this is not one of those things. You've picked a terribly lonely hill to die on if you seriously mean to stick up for all the poor victims of driving under the influence who now have to pay higher insurance rates.

I'm not sure if I should ask where you live -- because I've lived in States (Louisiana) with stupidly high insurance rates -- or if I should bust out my small violin for the poor broke individual that owns four cars. :D

We pay around $1,600/yr for two cars, that we do not own outright and carry collision/comp on, and hell, it was closer to $1,200 before the masses realized you could steal my partner's car with a flathead screwdriver and TikTok video. My 2024 model year costs less to insure than her 2019 model year, lol, how dare USAA price ease of theft into the rate.

Actually, what they'll do, is raise the price of the ad-free tier to the point that it's unaffordable for most. They're on record on earnings calls saying they make more money from the cheaper (to the consumer) ad tier than they do from the current ad free tiers. The Internet allows them to do highly targeted advertising in a way that was never possible for broadcast/cable television, so they can charge a lot more money to the advertisers for the privilege of airing their ads, and as you note, they're unstoppable.

TNG's remaster is 1080 and was extremely well done, you're denying yourself a great experience if you stick to DVD cuts. It's absolutely beautiful in 1080. You can also see a lot of the gags the set designers built into consoles, thinking the text would never be visible on screen. You'll also realize society owes Marina Sirtis a collective apology, lol, but that's a different discussion.

My favorite part of Paramount+ and a few other platforms, when they decided to stick ads in, they failed to do what TV has been doing since the 1950s and properly sync the ads to the scene cuts. Doing a re-watch of TNG with my partner and where the commercial break naturally was, no commercial, you'd get 5-10 seconds into the next scene (the return from commercial in the original airing) and then BANG, cut to ads.

I'm shocked they couldn't find a way to automate this task and failing that, pay some intern an entry level wage to do it for them, "Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to watch 178 episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and press this button after each scene change." I'll sign up for that job at minimum wage, lol.

Of course, the real answer is they just don't care about the consumer experience, it's all about $$$

We gave up and signed up for the ad free tier, which is kind of funny, because if you listen to their earnings calls they make MORE money from the cheaper to the consumer ad supported tiers. You'd think they'd want to get it right.

What is the half-life of the off-gassing process here? In other words, at what age are these cars relatively safe of those cancer-causing chemicals?

I had the same thought, I have to think the "new car smell" is in part that chemical, and after a few years that is pretty much gone.

I also have an older car (2011), which I'm happy about as well... I did buy it new but I drive around with my window down whenever I can so I figure that helped reduce my exposure.

They didn't ship stickers with the Vision Pro, if that didn't get stickers then I assumed stickers were just done for all new products.

Yep, this exactly is the point. Helping people for free. Not helping megacorporations

You misunderstand. When I say I do it yto help people for free, I mean the ONLY point is to help some coder for free.

If someone makes profit in the middle I DO NOT CARE. They can be 70 billion dollars on my amazing thoughts on use of semicolons and I DO NOT CARE. As long as it helps someone else down the line.

Far too much of the world is consumed with worry over who is making a profit on what. Screw that. I only care that in the end what I wrote helps someone, I do not care via what route it reaches them.

They don't really care about what you think "network neutrality" means.

They want everyone in the U.S. to be on as shitty an internet as possible to reduce the ability to communicate with each other and the world. Bye-bye fast lanes! Everyone gets the same speed, which will be poor.

The internet has allowed Farr too much flexibility in people communicating to the mind of the government, time to lock that shit down.

Not too worry though. Most answers on SO are so poor that this AI has no chance.

Although this is true, it's still the best of all possible options as far as I can tell. If I'm searching for a coding question I will turn to any StackOverflow post over any Medium article...

Although I may have to hunt through answers a bit to find the truly best solution over the accepted one.

What you say is why I still don't use AI for coding much if at all, I never find very useful what it tries to give me.

So... Thanos was right?

what are the AIs gonna do with a population that just doesn't die off?

If people do not die off naturally they will be made to die off artificially.

Works for Canada.

You might note that I said most people don't regard it as inherently dangerous. I chose brevity rather than a wall of text about alcohol abuse that manifests in a minority of users.

Regarding insurance companies, I think you already know the answer: That person has demonstrated absolutely horrible judgment and the statistics on recidivism for DWI aren't flattering. They'll probably cancel you outright, if allowed under state law, but if they keep you they will surcharge you for the longest period of time allowed under state law. Note that they don't ask if you drink and surcharge you if you answer in the affirmative. They surcharge people that have demonstrated an inability to drink within the confines of the law and common sense.

Long ago in a galaxy far away I worked in the insurance business. Would it surprise you to know there's one thing you can do that will frighten an insurance company more than a DWI? Fall asleep behind the wheel. You were probably just fatigued but for all they know there's an underlying medical condition that will manifest again and again. They will run for the hills if allowed by state law/regulation. I saw more cancellations/non-renewals for this than for DWI.

Either scenario poses extreme risk for a policy limit claim, e.g., you seriously injure or kill someone. That can happen with mundane violations (speeding, running a stop sign, etc.) too but it's a lot less likely. They don't care about property damage, short of totaling someone's Bentley there's a limit on property claims. Most are rounding errors for a large insurance company. Personal injury on the other hand, that can easily hit seven digits, occasionally eight. You probably don't have that much coverage but most people carry six digits worth. $300,000 was the average when I was in the business. That's real money by anyone's metric.

The whole point of answering on StackOverflow is to help people. For free.

Spreading the knowledge you posted out to an even wider group of people is exactly what everyone should want to happen with information they posted.

I imagine they could make the whole issue go away by giving anyone who complains 10 reputation points. Or ignite a bonfire by giving anyone who complains a "Whiner" badge. :-)

That hasn't been true since the 19th Century, regardless of what the CCP claims to whip up nationalist furor. No Mainland Chinese Government has exercised sovereignty over Taiwan in living memory and the CCP only cares because a successful non-despotic Taiwan serves as a constant reminder to their own people that there's an alternative to their governance model.

Too bad for them Winnie-the-Pooh abandoned the pretense of "One Country, Two Systems" by cracking down on Hong Kong. Whatever (slim) chance there was at a peaceful reunification evaporated when the people of Taiwan saw what happened there.