I’ll check it out, thank you. Sounds simpler than changing my number after 20 years.

I have been receiving so much spam the last 9 months. At first, I attributed it to the election, but it has actually escalated since December. I recieve 20+ blocked calls a day at this point. They sometimes use one or two new numbers in a day, so I have to add those to the list. Before I had enough of the numbers blocked, my phone was going off incessantly. Idk were my number appeared to cause this, but I’ve had to shut off my voicemail and block all texts from numbers not already saved on my phone. I think I might just change my number at this point, it might actually be more convenient.

I’m not sure why people downvoted instead of educating. To answer your question: no, it isn’t. It has been awhile since I’ve used torrents, so this may be a little out of date, but typically, within your P2P client you’ll have active “seeds,” including while you’re downloading. Some people immediately delete files from “active” after their download is complete. It is generally considered proper etiquette to leave the torrent active (at least) until it you have uploaded approximately 2x what you have downloaded. This helps keep torrents active and relatively quick, while not placing the bulk of the bandwidth burden on a few seeders.

Not only that, but you’re often not getting the quality you’re paying for due to the limitations of streaming. So, I’m not going to pay $20+ a month for what equates to 720i with garbage audio. Absolutely not.

They did this to whatever hbo plan I was on a while back. It was 4k with atmos, and they switched it to 1080 with standard audio while expecting me to continue paying the same price. Canceled as soon as I received that email.

Oh, ok. I definitely didn’t read it in this case.

Damn, I didn’t know that was a thing either, lol. I’d play retro games on the TV remote.

Wasn’t it all mobile games? I’m pretty sure that was the exact market they were looking for. People with short attention spans that can’t put down the phone, even while consuming other media.

This is all a misunderstanding! The high price IS the regular price. We lower the prices at certain times to benefit our customers, who we love so very much. This is totally not surge pricing!

Maybe the therapist is trying to drum up business with subtle torture techniques.

That, and I’m just proficient enough with computers to fuck shit up.

That could very well be the case. I was on a beater laptop previously that was no longer functioning with windows and I needed something for school. I remember I that I wasn’t able to get the wifi card to work with Linux so I ended up getting an external card. It likely is different now and I have a proper desktop, but the experience was rough and I’m not eager to repeat it, lol.

Most people don’t. So, for an average employee, it would be 9-530 to account for their unpaid 30m lunch required by law.

I use 11 and don’t see any ads and have telemetry turned off. I’m not sure where this is coming from, but I keep hearing it, and it doesn’t mesh with my experience.

I’ve personally thought about going back to Linux, and I still might next time I upgrade my MOBO, but the thought of all the effort it will take to get all of my hardware working again is exhausting. That was the greatest struggle before I even approached software issues. I’ve heard it is better these days, but I’m not an expert or a programmer, so I’m essentially relying that someone else has had my use case, solved it, and made it publicly available which is not always the case.

I’ll give you that, but that other commenter seemed to think it wouldn’t be “fair” if another employee used it, and they didn’t, which is a very childish notion. Depending on severity and duration, I could even see it being a talking to. I do also see not being able to find this employee suitable for a position of trust, which they may have been in given their salary. If the employer can’t trust you to self-regulate on something as simple as a meal voucher, I don’t see how they could trust you at large.

I’m just explaining how the real world works. For instance, I supervise other employees. Their hourly rate is lower than mine, however, the real cost of many of the employees I supervise far exceeds my real cost. How? Well, some have dependants and they are included on their health insurance. Beyond that, some have chosen different providers or higher option plans than I have. There are other benefits that can increase their real cost to the employer. Does that mean my employer owes me the difference in cash or other tangible rewards based on how I choose to take advantage of the benefits offered? What if I chose not to contribute to my retirement, do they owe me that match percentage, even though that’s not his it’s outlined? This is absurd. There are problems with capitalism and corporations in this country, but expecting people to follow simple guidelines regarding a meal voucher isn’t one of them, especially for well compensated employees. Realistically, meta could probably refer this to the local police as fraud if they chose to.

This was for sites that didn’t have a cafeteria. They offered this as a way to provide food, while on-site, if the employee would like to. This childish notion that “sOmBoDy GoT mOrE tHaN mE!” is ridiculous. This wasn’t supposed to be for personal monetary gain. Employees with sites that had cafeteria are not handed cash or allowed to select household goods if they choose not to eat at the cafeteria. This isn’t something that should really have to be explained to grown-ass adults making 400k a year. This is just an extreme level of entitlement and I can’t believe people are making me defend a company who’s products I refuse to use.

Right? I promise not to scheme on $10 worth of toothpaste.

That would make it more plausible. I don’t think you’re an idiot, I was asking because I was curious if there was precedent for a jackass conspiracy minded employee handing out medical advice causing liability for a business. I wouldn’t think it is right, but I also don’t agree with other legal standards, lol.

Would a court find Walmart liable for your decision to take medical advice from a random employee? I’m sure Walmart could demonstrate that the employee was not acting in the capacity of their role and any reasonable person would not consider drinking bleach because an unqualified walmart employee told them so.