There are a lot of people who believe Rust will get rid of ALL their security errors, not just memory errors. That's why it's a dangerous language.

And yet, you jumped into the argument as if it were fresh dung and you were a dung beetle.

And there it is, you're a dung beetle white space Python fan who can't resist defending your bad decisions.

Swift programmers were worse. It's a crappy language (has all the warts of Objective-C and adds some of its own), but as soon as you say "the enum system makes it easy to write confusing code" you will have all kinds of Swift programmers coming out to insult you and your dog.

What does he say? Anything interesting?

it was in an 'unsafe' section for what it is worth.

But then systems programing means you're going to have a lot of that. So maybe rust really isn't such a good systems language... as it does not really get you much when you can't use its safety features.

Cooking with bare aluminium pans isnt exactly hazard free. Iron is fine but boy does it take some cleaning.

100% racist to ruzzians, as I said, these are not creatures I want to be around or associated with. AFAIC they are not humans, some sort of cocroach lizzards.

I'm not sure the victorians could be accused of having used a plain style. Their prose was often more contorted with more unnecessary padding words than shakespear .

utter nonsense.

There was no real problem sidelining as many people during the pandemic and similarly the economy even the economics of places like NOVA and DC during government shut downs was not collapse.

Any landlord with sense would have waited to start evictions knowing their usually in good standing tenants who are late this month likely have a temporary reason. State and Locals could have found a way to make food-stamps or something like it availible to ensure groceries got purchased.

It was in no way necessary to bail out the credit market.

Similarity lenders and mortgage services are not unsophisticated, they could have easily run some reports to see which entities were paying more than monthly load payment etc. They could have reached out to those borrowers and offered to match some portion of additional dollars. That would not have required modifying loans that might be parted up or anything, it would have secured cash for current obligations at the cost of profits, but well that is how its supposed to work.

The finance industry got away with fleecing us all because the Treasury, Fed, and POTUS turned out to have a pair testicles between em.

Exactly AIG never should have got a bailout.

I honestly thought Bush was/had been doing a fairly good job up until the point he turned his back capitalism.

He'd be drawn like a moth to flame in this discussion yet he hasn't materialized. - Must mean his primary account has mod points. I have already seen a number of 'disagree' mods here.

So you're argument is the current status quo is a backdoor to price discrimination; where social pressure encourages the people who are able to pay more.

You might be right and I don't have a problem with negotiated pricing, or algorithm driven pricing. It is just haggling dressed up. I'd much rather Door Dash us an algorithm to effect this though, like this guy orders deliver a lot, he'll pay...take on %5, or this order is several $100 probably an office paying with company cash, cha-ching... This is food from a N-tier restaurant apply...

You get quoted a price and you accept or don't. There is no opportunity for much actual abuse. The problem now is you have propaganda telling perspective gig workers what a great opportunity Door Dash is - most of these people are probably not the most on top of their personal accounting. I hate to see them get to the end of month and then figure out because they did not make much in tips they actually lost money driving; which I expect is entirely possible..

Again I do believe a free people should be able to make whatever contract they want. I don't think its wrong to 'over charge' someone if you are upfront about the price tag. Sure maybe you are selling at 500% margin, if they want to pay without taking the effort to look around at the market place, so be it. I think it is more abusive though flash that 'add tip' button which may not have been expected after the transaction has been otherwise agreed too, and I think its abusive to sell employees on uncertain comp, I don't like to hear "well our base salary is only X but the bonus here are great" at interviews either. That turns into surprise we had a bad q4 no bonus this year way to easily.

Again not saying we should legislate these practices, but this is where education is key. Usually when a transaction is more complicated than you'll give me X, and I'll pay you $Y for it; that added complication/structure is designed to benefit one party or the other. More people should realize that.

Nope - I don't like the behavior but if people want to work for Door Dash, and customers want to use it as it operates today, that is their problem.

I would have no interest in being a door dasher and while I might choose to be a consumer, I only do so as long as their the only game in town.

I don't know. As a member of the freemarket faithful I think people should see the real costs of everything, obscuring it does not help anybody make more rational choices.

It is like tax withholding - that should not be a thing, people should be made to write a check or setup an ACH for the full amount of their taxes owed. People who are expected to actually owe more than few large, should pay quarterly estimated taxes. I think it would change a lot of peoples opinion about the value of government services. The current system is just a scheme to split the payment up into multiple places so as to obscure what the real bill is.

The expansion if tipping is the same nonsense, now historically couriers have been tipped which is what these people are. However we have gone to the expectation of that being restaurant style tips of 15-20% sometimes more! As if they have been hovering over me keeping my water glass full, and bringing me anything else I might need for the last hour. A tip should be an actual tip - "thanks for being on time, here is some $(candy bar money) for the effort). It should not be 20% of the total just for doing the job in the case of a delivery person. If it needs to be that to make it worth their while, I think yes they should be paid more, and that should be reflected in the quoted delivery fee!

For actual hospitality workers, wait staff, concierge, guides, trainers, etc - sure tipped wages make sense, a lot of what the consumer is paying for is between them and that staff member and has little to do with the house. So tips should be significant and expected when reasonable service is offered. A delivery is not that, the expectation from the outset is item is supposed to be arrive at $place at $time. A door dasher is really not different from the FedEx guy, and I don't think they get many tips. As a consumer my entire relationship with them is "Here is your package", "Ok thanks". Door Dash *should* be paying them enough to make the work worth their time if I tip or don't. I know they don't and I do tip as result, but no it does not make sense for tips to be more than handful of percent of the total comp a delivery person makes.