IrateAnteater

Many routes through the city are inaccessible via only side streets

That's the part I want changed. Make them accessible, but to bike and foot traffic only. Make it so that biking is actually easier than driving.

One thing that I think Ford might have accidentally gotten right for the wrong reasons is focusing on adding bike lanes to side streets instead of main thoroughfares. Why only stick bike lanes on main roads? Bikes can just as easily travel on side streets, where there is even less chance of getting hit by drivers in a hurry. For side streets that don't go extend far enough, you could even start building dedicated bike paths to give bikes and pedestrians access that cars can't use.

Does it even matter if you wind up being a good person either way?

Lucky, most of us weren't dumb enough to be using our real names.

To be fair, our absurdist brain rot generally centered around silly flash animations and one time viral moments. Modern brain rot is centered around influencers and "real" interactions. That and a lot of older millennials went through childhood at a time when being terminally online wasn't usually an option.

Every application kind of needs two modes: a default mode where the user is railroaded into making the right decision, and an "I'm not an idiot and will actually read the documentation before/after trying to make things work" mode. If you stick the toggle for the two modes somewhere that you'd only find by reading the documentation, people will automatically categorize themselves into the mode the ought to be in.

Having dealt with people, conversations along the lines of the following have absolutely happened way more often than they should;

Customer: "Hey, my drive died, you need to replace it."

Synology Support: "ok, which model of drive is it and where did you purchase it from?"

Customer: "it's an unlabeled drive I found on the side of the road."

Synology Support: "..."

Like I said, I don't support the move, but I'm not at all surprised that it happened.

I don't support this decision in any way, but I can at least think of some legitimate motivation for it (assuming the Synology branded ones aren't marked up from the equivalent Seagate/Toshiba ones). I imagine Synology has to deal with a lot of service calls and returns for issues that are caused by shoddy drives (like those Seagate drives with the fudged lifespan numbers), not by anything that they can directly control.

In reality, the above was probably what sparked the idea, but I'm betting that they're going to jack up the price of those drives just to squeeze out a little more profit for this quarter.

I'm 90% sure that would block no actual porn.

Ah the joys of being an hourly employee. They can try calling me at 3am. I won't be answering though.

Sound quality will be exactly the same among any of the services that offer lossless files (ie all of the ones that aren't Spotify). That's literally the point of lossless.

I know this is just supposed to be a joke, but I'm pretty sure that the ven diagram of people who called this inspirational and people who support what the Trump administration is doing is just two completely separate circles.