or maybe the chrome webstore allows an extension to do this. there are a few that do this but it looks like they're being black-balled by the chrome webstore.
"usage-based pricing provides more options for consumers than flat-rate pricing and can generate additional revenue to fund network improvements and expansion."
i don't mind usage based pricing if they show you how much you've used and ideally where you've used it. then i can simply cut out all the services that suck up all that data. For example, I refuse to install Facebook because it's hundreds of MB.
this means we need more visibility on what's sucking up so much data. and then we need to start boycotting and deleting any and all apps that insist on wasting so much data. i bet, those services and sites that are so huge will quickly clean up their act once we all stop using them. Or they'll just go out of business and we can choose some better ones.
Two fatal issues I discovered:
- the apple store was so biased, even when I typed in "piano tabs", it couldn't find your app in the top 10 results. I had to type in the name of the entire app: "Piano Tabs: Learn & Practice"
Then I attempted to install it and got this:
- "This application requires iOS 15.0 or later". This is a deal breaker on so many apps. I don't trust apple enough to change my iOS version. Note: this happened on a pretty recent iphone 7+
Absolutely. i so often do a search and it presumes to think it knows what i want rather than giving me what I ask for, sometimes even when I'm being quite specific. I will say it does a great job for programming stuff but a lousy job whenever I'm researching economics topics.
are you really telling me, that after humanity somewhat x100 times productivity improvement over the last 10,000 years, in one of the "richest" countries in the world, the richest 1-4% within that rich country (top 0.1-0.4% in the world, very roughly) can't take a couple years off from work because they can't afford it?
There's nothing wrong with sympathy. I have all the sympathy in the world for anyone who works at a software company. Those FANGs can be especially toxic.
The fact is, how you spend your money, it's a choice, especially if you're single. For singles, no excuses. In my twenties, i rented a room, slept on a surfboard and ate oatmeal. If you combine that with a Meta salary, you could retire in 5-10 years.
I'm so relieved someone is working on this. I mean, the cars of the 60s and 70s, many of them were so much lighter. Now all the sudden, cars have become fat and heavy and bloated.
Of course it all comes down to consumer demand and regulations. I suspect Regulations have gone a long way towards making cars heavier and bigger and less efficient.
The major selling points of metaverse is that you can do work or play from anywhere (why else would you wear a 1500$ helmet that makes you look like a goofball). The push to "be at the office" is proof that metaverse does NOT work. It's truely ironic.
>>> "“They’re saying it’s ‘Hunger Games’ meets ‘Lord of the Flies,’ where everyone is trying to prove their worth to management.”
It sounds like people are really insecure about themselves financially or egoistically. You don't want to put yourself in a position where you have to have your job or you can't go without one for a few a years. and if you're ego can't handle being laid off or fired, you may want to do something about that because jobs these days don't last much longer than 2-4 years at most places: just look at people's resumes on linkedIn.
here in CA, the CPUC is trying their best to prevent people from adding Solar to their roofs. They've even got rid of Net metering almost entirely with their new NEM 3 rules.
This isn't the first time humanity has improved productivity. Productivity has already been increased by x10 or x100 in the last 10,000 years and yet the unemployment rate is at record low levels. this latest round of efficiency gains is no different.
production costs decreasing doesn't mean less wages. A widget worker in a factory who produces twice as many widgets an hour can still make the same amount of money or maybe even more.
the problem is not efficiency itself, necessarily. The problem is, what are the side effects, what are the negative impacts?
In theory, efficiency in a competitive landscape should bring down production costs which then brings down consumer costs and thus raise material living standards. The problem is, all this efficiency is in bits not atoms. Digital goods are becoming cheaper every year but real products (housing, transportation, utilities, etc) show no improvement over the last 2 to 3 decades), in fact is even getting slightly worse.
i mean by having inflation run hot at 5-10% for many years or decades, they're defaulting on their obligation to provide a stable value currency for the people.
I sympathize with the article's criticism of all those things it mentioned but someone's gotta like it (gas stations, cigarettes, junk food, bible versus, lawyers, etc), otherwise it wouldn't be everywhere, and probably a whole lot of someones, perhaps even the majority of people.