Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)DI
Posts
0
Comments
378
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Anecdotally sure, but for the majority of people I'd be right. And that's what matters - at a small level you'll have outliers but if you're winning the majority of the market then you will crush your competitors. Again it's irrelevant whether your code is good or efficient or replaced by llms so long as you are winning long enough to kill your competition.

  • They may be failing but they have replaced the industry so it's irrelevant.

    • Do you use Yahoo or AltaVista to search?
    • Do you still use taxis?
    • Do you use Blockbuster or subscribe to a standard cable package?

    I'd wager you say no to all of them. So while the old may be right, it's irrelevant because they were still outperformed and no longer exist or are just not as competitive.

    Again, people get hung up on the best or right way to do things when the reality is that's not how business works.

  • They're two different market segments. The Quest is definitely more practical for most people, but to just day it's better in every way is a disservice to the fact the tech in the Vision Pro is the best version of VR out there. It's just way too expensive.

  • Your comment suggests you read the first paragraph and didn't read the rest which is disappointing.

    The article talks about the most common complaint being comfort, then goes on to other complaints like the fact it offers no productivity savings and is expensive.

    It's a bit of a no brainer though at end of day. Anyone surprised this is just a gimmick like any other is new to the VR space.

  • Great!

    This is a fair reply, but it sounds like we're both on the same page. Yes, both parties have their own issues but saying they're the same isn't correct. If you're in a position of picking between them then clearly one side is less corrupt than the other.

  • Ok you're completely ignoring my points and just parroting a single example you can't move on from, which again, is my issue with your post. And I'm not trying to win the argument, just walk through basic facts/logic. You are the one using ad hominems against myself which is ironic.

    So we'll just have to agree to disagree as you aren't doing this in good faith or are purposely trolling.

  • I'm not admitting how ineffectual they are. It's just hard to push laws through when one party is clearly trying to stop you from doing the right thing.

    It's like saying that people fighting for climate change are the same as those arguing against climate change because they're not getting climate change law through.

    Your point either makes no sense or you're arguing in bad faith. I wish it was the first but I've dealt with too many people who are just trolling and reporting right wing rhetoric.

  • Sorry, here you go since you missed the comment seemingly.

    "It will never happen. Biden is owned by the same people as Trump. There's only one party, the party of the Oligarchs."

    Did you even read what OP said lol? It's right in front of you, the first sentences. If I'm being dishonest then you are on another level of insane/lying.

  • "It will never happen. Biden is owned by the same people as Trump. There's only one party, the party of the Oligarchs. All of the petty shit about abortion, trans rights, gay rights, racial equality, gender equality, religion, second amendment, etcetera are all distractions to keep us all at each others throats while the rich cocksuckers figure out more insidious ways to fuck us all over."

    ?

    Did you even read what OP said lol?

  • Wow this is an insane take. I don't often speak to right wingers but this is pretty far from reality. None of what you wrote is accurate and I never called anyone a fascist.

    I'm just relying on the evidence that clearly doesn't line up with whatever rhetoric you're spewing. Jeez that's vile though.

  • Let me explain it to you since you don't seem to understand.

    OP makes a statement that all democrats and republicans act the same and are equal.

    I say no, that's not right.

    Other poster says well if you look at this one example, they voted together!

    I said looking at one example isn't reflective of the whole picture. That I can just pick another example that shows they don't vote together. You need to look at it overall instead of cherypicking facts that suit you.

    Do you understand the logic there and why what you wrote makes no sense?

    I can make it simpler perhaps if you need it.

  • Wow. Thanks for cherry picking one thing out of hundreds to show your point! That's a solid way of arguing.

    Would you like me to cherry pick an example of one which disproves you? Or would you like to examine the evidence as a whole and actually properly examine it?