efrique

joined 1 year ago
[–] efrique@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

The headline's confusing. If a losing bet is backfiring, does that mean it's now a winning bet?

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

heh, all of them (plus several others) were on my list of "never buy from them" list a decade ago. Never had any reason to reconsider

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It's not the word "lighter" that's the issue, it's the word "less". If I say something weighs 80% less, ... you know how much that is. 100% less, it weighs even less -- nothing at all. 500% less (i.e. 5 times less), suddenly it weighs more?

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 55 points 1 year ago (15 children)

I've been saying for about 15 years now -- you'd have to be a masochist to buy HP printers. Why do people keep enabling these shits? You just encourage them to be even worse. Don't stand for even a little of their bullshit and they will change or die. You make a noose for your own neck.

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Neither, though I do watch a bit of Matt Parker on youtube, so it's a decent guess.

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's a publicly traded company. It's owned by shareholders. You may be thinking of the CEO.

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"one fifth the mass" is not the same thing as "five times lighter"

Consider something that weighs half as much. It's 50% lighter ... 0.5 times lighter. Something that weighs 0.2 times as much has 20% of the weight, and is 80% lighter. If it weighed 1% as much, it would be 99% lighter (0.99 times lighter). If it was 100% lighter ... it would weigh nothing. Five times lighter would be -4 times the original mass.

We already have accurate and precise ways to describe less mass (albeit leaving aside for the moment the distinction between mass and weight). It's no harder to say "one fifth" than "five times", but only one is correctly describing what is going on.

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I expect a lot more authors will go this (crowdfunding) route; if Kelsey Dionne can get over $1.3 million for a fairly niche TTRPG product (albeit that it was a very well done example of its particular niche), publishing straight up fiction books via crowdfunding has to look pretty damn attractive.

(edit: added a missing word)

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Yeah. Not a certainty, even with everything, but sure -- an increasingly solid chance of it.

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

And if it's the first time you've seen that xkcd link, congratulations, you are one of today's meta-10000

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

What, too soon?

[–] efrique@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

heard that one earlier today ...

view more: ‹ prev next ›