I really don't understand the boner so many Americans seem to have for vigilantism
Just fix your goddamn police system - there's a reason why vigilantism is outlawed since it's too easy to misjudge or misidentify stuff and the consequences are horrible - let professionals do their job properly
I mean the fact that the US secret service warned similar activists that they are in danger makes it clear that there probably is some proof but its also probably impossible to reveal without outing and informant
Investing money in someone to start a business because you believed that business would be worth it in the end happened way earlier though.
That's just more abstract as the final value you can receiv isn't capped anymore - but just having a loan-based economic model is already pretty capitalistic tbh.
But I see how what was basically the creation of stocks can also be seen as a starting point
Also the subconcious knowledge that they are where they are because their ancestors exploited other humans and the only way to not feel guilty about that is by continuing to see those other humans as "lesser" than them so it was okay what there ancestors did so it's also fine if they are doing it
because once you accept that your country is as wealthy as it is because of exploitation you have to decide if you are going to keep your lifestyle and continue that exploitation or if you are realizing that something like that is unacceptable and that that means that you likely have to cut down your lifestyle a bit
conservatives are all about "nothing should change" but that fundamentally means continuing the exploitation and if you are aware of that and want to stay conservative then the road to racism is very short
Putting that kind of switch on a password safe seems to be the best option by far.
Not having to worry about single accounts and on top also having the ability to save insurance numbers, bank accounts etc. - if tagged/organised correctly a password-safe would've helped to much by not having to dig through binders of papers to see which insurances where running and which not for example and if you missed an account or some portfolio
Just use a password manager and set a switch up there
Then (if you have a well structured password safe) you also give whoever you choose to give it to information about your bank accounts or insurance numbers that relatives might not be aware of
Going through all the books to figure out what's relevant and what you have to care for is a huge pain.
I don't know if I'd want my lawyer to spend hours (that I'd have to pay for) in order to get access to accounts that might be relevant.
Who knows what's relevant in the end?
Sure if you're saving the logins for porn inside your manager, too, then it's going to be awkward but so is the old-school porn-box under the bed or the toys-drawer
That's because you are not in a position to produce and sell a game.
As a user it sure is the case but as a developer you are in a position that you either have to take their 30% cut or accept that you are selling way less
The fact that pretty much immediately after epic launched their store steam lowered the cut for big publishers tells you that they are fully aware that 30% is too much to be reasonable but they completely could get away with that because Devs just didn't have a choice.
Because of epic that now changed since even if you don't actually sell more games you at least can get a guaranteed profit as if you sold those games that you miss out on by not being on steam.
Sure the way epic is doing it is not good but I really don't see another way how a significant number of buyers would ever come to another store. That didn't work for EA, that didn't work for Ubisoft, that also didn't work for GOG where you actually own the game without DRM and not just a license to play it as long as the server is allowing you.
People are fundamentally lazy and hate changing their routines - that's why forcing them into buying at your store is necessary if you want to get them to switch.
I mean that's the same side that steam is using their monopoly for, too
For the users it's definitely the most relaxed option - but as a developer if you choose to not put up with steams 30% rule you are fucked.
The fact that pretty much immediately after epic gained traction steam announced cheaper rates for bigger publishers tells you that they definitely are aware of how 30% is too much
Personally that's why I buy all my games on gog if possible even though I have a Steamdeck and that makes stuff more complicated.
People denying steam has a monopoly are probably also denying other fundamental truths that would imply that they had to change their lifestyle (climate change anyone?)
Apple has successfully trademarked everything that remotely looks like an apple with a bite taken out - there's a good chance it'll work