Yes, hence they reveal that they think the staus quo is the correct way of doing things... Though to be fair, being a little reactionary is hard wired in human brains and is especially prone to surface for those politically illiterate (or idiots in Greek).
There is. Also, if you want to mourn or fear that loss, you have to do it beforehand. Thus making the reaction to fear death completely rational for atheists.
Overleaf are not benefactors that develop LaTeX for economic gains, unlike the situation with Typst that rely on it (to my knowledge). LaTeX is also cross platform, supported in tons of editors and can easily be converted to other formats with pandoc. It is also somewhat supported in other formats using implementations such as KaTeX for Markdown and Mathjax in HTML due to being the defacto standard for math typesetting.
Writing papers in LaTeX is a joy, not a pain. The end result is also a beautifully typeset document rivalled by none.
The experience gained from the production and maintenance of LaTeX2e (the version you have been using for many years) had a major influence on our goals for future development and on new code which is now integrated into LaTeX.
A while ago we made the decision to drop the idea of a separate LaTeX3 format that would exist in parallel to LaTeX2e, but instead decided to gradually modernize LaTeX to keep it competitive in today’s world while maintaining compatibility methods for older documents.
I think this decision was pretty much a good one.
Overleaf does not modernize LaTeX in meaningful ways. It only adds cloud functionality and glossy appearance that you can get on dedicated editors anyways.
Learning LaTeX and working around its quirks seems like a much better time investment than sidegrading to something that lives on premises given by a proprietary commercial project. If someone saw LaTeX and said "I want to make some version of this that is better", without alterior motives, they would probably just work on improving LaTeX (which a whole lot of people do).
Fancy does not mean better, and often is in many ways worse than plain old boring.
Literally everything on Lemmy was said for a reason.
Yeah, I just love defying the existence of causal relations. Sigh. It is not like you are totally misquoting me and yourself at all here and making "needs to be said" into "literally any fucking reason to say something".
But you as an individual choosing not to tip doesn't really impact that.
Maybe my original idea was to create awareness around an issue to maximize my individual impact? (this is also the reason why above, though it still does not count as on a "need to be said"-basis that you first introduced as the bar for saying something).
So now I already spent way too many words to make something clear that you only wanted to obfuscate in, what I assume must be, bad faith. Lastly, another obvious thing is that contributing to a greater whole is actually contributing towards it. Therefore I also care about my personal actions that say contribute towards climate change.
You are free to look at the statistics of how many more are paid less than the minimum wage (where that even needs to be a thing) in professions with tipping than those without. Also, please tip your teachers, cashiers at the grocery store, bus driver, garbage man, etc.. It is very nice when employers can use their god given right to labour without adequate compensation. You only make the world better by doing so because they get more $$$$$!
No, it does not because that is not how genes work. You are also not applying logic properly (and no, being wrong twice does not make it more right). A better analogy would be throwing garbage into the sea. Sure there might be some scraps of food on it that animals may eat, but you are also in fact contributing to killing them.
Nothing on Lemmy is posted on basis of "needs to be mentioned", which kind of makes your question moot. Tipping causes lower wages because it relieves the employers of the obligation of paying their workers. Also, I am talking about systemic change, so what is "occasional" or otherwise conditional is not really a valid counter to the general point.
Norms are susceptible to change. Just as they are perhaps changing for the worse where I live, it could change for the better somewhere else. This is dependant on people not being idiots, so I am rooting for you.
Sorry, but you are wrong. I am not from Burgerland and tipping is not the standard here. I will not contribute to normalizing it either just because some restaurants hate their employees.
I never tip because that only serves to lower the wages of employees.
EDIT: The downvote button to this comment is actually an "I am a complete ass who thinks that living wages are something that I, the ever benevolent patron, should bestow upon the worthy serfs at my discretion"-button.
Yup! Also one has to mind the order in which one rolls the dice. Since 10 and 5 could be either 05 or 50. As a bonus, if you roll them in order of "tens" to "ones", getting 10 on the first dice has added suspense since the latter dice determines if it is going to count as a low roll of 0X (by rolling 1-9 on the next dice X) or if it is going to be a max roll of 100 (by rolling another 10).
Urist @ Urist @lemmy.ml Posts 1Comments 592Joined 2 yr. ago
Yes, hence they reveal that they think the staus quo is the correct way of doing things... Though to be fair, being a little reactionary is hard wired in human brains and is especially prone to surface for those politically illiterate (or idiots in Greek).