Google was the first example I thought of, because they were founded in 1998, solidly before the dotcom crash. They survived because they hoarded data.

My point was that every company going into the bubble thought they had a product they could monetize, but virtually all of them failed in favor of just hoarding everyone’s data. Amazon and eBay were competing for ecomerce supremacy, but now even they are just privacy violators for various reasons (amazon via AWS and Alexa, eBay in the interest of detecting malicious account behaviour).

MySpace is an example of another unsustainable social media model in the vein of many dotcom era services. They died out as soon as Facebook realized they could hoard everyone’s data.

All roads lead to privacy nightmares. It’s the fossil fuel of the internet, and enshitification is the climate change.

That describes the business model of basically every internet company that survived the dotcom bubble.

Can’t believe how strange it is to be anything at all

Keyword: “satire”. I assume that was pen name for comedic value.

I don’t think this is what you’re experiencing, but I had an alarm go off randomly for one beep once. Went and looked at it, and a few seconds later a spider crawled out and away from it.

If it’s photoelectric, anything that could scatter light could cause it to go off. Is your house dusty?

Ahh, that might be it. I run TrueNAS too. IMO that should be the default behavior, and you should have to explicitly pass a flag if you want mount to silently mask off part of your filesystem. That seems like almost entirely a tool to shoot yourself in the foot.

I think I would have expected/preferred mount to complain that you’re trying to mount to a directory that’s not empty. I feel like I’ve run into that error before, is that not a thing?

If your claim is that randos on the internet don’t send death threats at the drop of a hat, you must be new here. We all know gd well everyone involved recieved death threats.

There’s gotta be a solution that leverages their unwavering support for the 4th amendment here. I mean a penis is basically a naturally occurring gun, already. You could almost certainly get a congressman to endorse porn in schools this way.

When I was in highschool, it was normal for everyone in my mostly male friend group to greet each other with hugs. I remember my dad saying he found it weird. Didn’t change anything.

It has a File Browser tab on the left that lets you view thumbnails of all the images in a folder. From there you can select multiple images to do batch operations on, or pick a single image to open in the editor. Not sure if that’s what you mean.

Yes, I was making sure that was the distinction you were making, because I’m trying to disambiguate for you: the employees of valve are both shareholders and stakeholders.

Simplex is the first platform I’ve heard of that doesn’t use IDs (which doesn’t make much sense to me, practically, but sure). So would you say everything is less secure than simplex?

Highly recommend putting that in a quote and giving a source rather than copy pasting a wall in plain text. For all I know you just asked ChatGPT and this is what it spat out.

And in this context, just the part about Gabe being majority shareholder would have sufficed.

Oh whoops, I thought you were trying to be taken seriously. My bad.

Sorry, the way i phrased that does sound causal. It should say “and”.

Any real lib knows, public or private, there’s no way out of our capitalist downfall.

How are you differentiating stakeholder and shareholder? The employees are certainly shareholders.

Valve doesn’t really hire “grunts”. The people who are actually considered employees of valve are very few and highly skilled. The number of Wikipedia from 2016 is very out of date and estimates 360. But valve’s LinkedIn still says “over 300”.

I had briefly searched to see if it was known how much ownership Gaben had. Did you find it somewhere, or are you just assuming he’s majority?

I do know the employees are compensated in shares of the company, but you’re right that I don’t know what proportion is owned by employees.

What makes session less secure? This is the first I’ve heard of it.

I think this post massively overestimates the power a CEO has. The CEO is beholden to the shareholders. Valve is private, so and its shareholders are its workers. It would be useful to know how many shares Gaben has of valve, but I still don’t think the next CEO would suddenly also be the majority owner.

Also, I know things have changed a lot in the last 12 years, but 12 years ago regarding the total dissolution of Valve, Gaben said:

“It’s way more likely we would head in that direction than say, ‘Let’s find some giant company that wants to cash us out and wait two or three years to have our employment agreements terminate."

Also, forcing users onto windows is THE way to kill valve’s profits. The whole point of the Linux push was a direct response to the windows store, and msft’s threat of forcing valve to give them a cut of purchase through steam. Msft will still do that the first chance it gets. So even the most profit-minded new leader wouldn’t make that choice, as it’s plainly shortsighted.