Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rapnie's commentslogin

It looks to me that this refers to a 272 page PDF report [0] on the theme "Happiness and Social Media" and the Executive summary explains that it is about much more than that simple question.

[0] https://files.worldhappiness.report/WHR26.pdf


> While stores often implement the technology to help curtail shoplifting, lawmakers and advocates are worried that it will be repurposed for profiling customers and adjusting prices based on information gathered.

Worried? With the web of 3rd party services that are somehow involved in the delivery of any cloud service, with all their different privacy policies that apply with carefully crafted legalese, hosted in different jurisdictions. Combined with that juicy data, the New Oil that fuels surveillance capitalism. Unless somehow watertight guarantees are provided, it is more realistic to assume widespread abuse is commonplace, and work from there.


Sadly, at least in the Netherlands, most restaurant have to pay extortionary prices to aggregator sites like The Fork and others, that most people use to find restaurants and reserve a table. In addition they are incentivised to offer reduced prices on their meals, so the algorithm ranks them higher. So dominant is the role of the aggregator that the restaurant cannot afford not to be listed, and lose the customer base that flows in through these aggregators. Having their own website is of lower concern than doing this well.

I imagine location matters even more? A well placed restaurant with adequate food probably does good business, still?

Sure is. I was contrasting 'merits' of being listed at aggregator sites vs. having ones own website.

The fediverse is also generally experienced as a small web, where it comes to mindset. Though that is not always to the liking or preference of those expecting to find alternatives to big church social media platforms.

So it loses pocket change for a multi billionaire?

Edit: The consideration being that perhaps billionaire toys need not be profitable per se, but are purchased for different reasons. Twitter is another example here.


A $100m here, a $100m there, pretty soon, you're talking real money.

That's assuming the pro-billionaire propaganda it produces doesn't make him many hundreds of millions more.

In that light an arbitrary but vaguely plausible reason to fire anyone who insists on doing actual journalism and not billionaire propaganda is a useful tool.


Y'all are talking about the real Scrooge McDuck.

Yeah, he could only keep this going for another 2600 years

I also went back to a wired mouse and never having a sudden lo-bat that interrupts my computer work.

You are lucky to get lo-bat. I get no-bat. Working perfectly one moment, not responding the next. Not so much as a popup telling me why my PC just got unresponsive.

The AI is the authority having so much knowledge, that we hear a reassuring "Please continue" [0].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment


Can we ascribe it all to ego, I wonder, or is it just one of several mechanics at play, albeit an important one. A Dutch saying is that there's a lid for every pot ("op elk potje past een dekseltje") i.e. that the most unlikely people still manage to find a partner and form a family. That very clumsy person who stutters, and is perceived by an ego-driven person as "a loser" still finds someone who thinks they are adorable and attractive.

Maybe not adorable and attractive, but just enough to settle for.

At work I dare to look stupid and in my friend group too. It hasn’t always led to a good outcome since people simply believe you’re actually stupid and the problem with that is that they don’t take you seriously enough. Now, you can say: their loss. But man, I need to eat. With friends, sure. At work? After years of looking stupid, I had enough of it.

Also finding a partner is mostly about being silly with each other. So looking a bit stupid is a plus there and had no issues about it on that front


Being silly is not being stupid. Being stupid is investing in lottery tickets, driving drunk, etc.

What is a Bank nowadays. It is nothing. It is a virtual construct and software that we are supposed to put our trust into, where banks have a history of betraying that trust.

It is not about playing new games though, but about affecting subtle changes over prolonged periods of time. You can't know the outcome, but you can help steer the right overall direction.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: