pixxelkick @ pixxelkick @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

544

Joined

2 yr. ago

Only heaters are a machine where the "good" output is one you want to be heat.

For other devices the heat is the bad part.

But since your goal with a heater... is to generate heat... and all energy eventually will become heat, it is close to 100% efficient.

If you can hear the heater's sound it makes in a room/area you don't want to be heating though, now it's <100% efficient as a tiny bit of energy became heat that heated the non ideal location.

Essentially you told someone who is trying to help an ailing loved one that essentially they could always just force an elder to move or abandon them and that the hardship is essentially their fault

This is a deeply reductive way to interpret what I said, and explains why your response was the way it is.

This is why I assume people don't understand what I write, because when people respond so intensely to what I consider lukewarm takes, and I ask them to try and re-iterate what they think I meant, it's usually an extremely reductive off base strawman.

I don't think it's on purpose, I just think tone and context are very difficulty to convey over text, and people will assume and interpret what a person writes as the worst possible take when they already disagree with them on something.

Not anything new, that's just how these chats tend to go, people fucking loathe anything that challenges their view and then interpret all follow up statements in the most reductive and off base way possible, to avoid confronting the possibility that the very first thing they got challenged by might possibly be right.

Blowback effect.

It's why Trump supporters, even when faced with insurmountable evidence they've hitched their horse to an out if control train wreck, will dug their heels in even further and demonize "the other side" despite the person they are following behind us literally quoting Hitler.

Because confronting the fact they truly were wrong, and were indoctrinated into a cult and fell for a massive amount of propaganda, means admitting they were foolish even when objective evidence is in front of them.

It's no different from people who truly believe the housing crisis is as bad as they think. It's like 90% propaganda built on top of misinterpreting/misrepresenting data... or just outright lying. It's got a foundation of using mathematical numbers explicitly to fool someone without a keen eye. Using stuff like the average price of housing as a baseline and etc.

People would rather keep staying hitched to an objectively false pile of lies and you can clearly see here how absolutely filled with vitriol the blowback kicks in when someone points out objective truths.

That's how intensely people will fight tooth nail and claw to avoid the possibility they were wrong. The fact the people fighting against me are insulting me, meming, trolling, etc should instantly be a red flag for which side is experiencing the blowback effect.

Let me also be clear here, my antagonistic stance and harsh demeanor are not directed directly at the people in this thread.

It's with respect towards the assholes that are perpetuating it to profit off people's ease in bring fooled

I'm not mad at you or really anyone here. I'm mad at the propaganda engine churning out disinformation at a profit and this thread is a testament to how fucking well oiled that engine is.

People, in here, are literally rehashing the premise if "how do I afford a home when my areas average/median price is x"

At this point that premise has basically become the "humans only use 10% of our brains" of realty in my eyes. Its an easy to swallow lie, it's built on bullshit, and everyone spreads it like wildfire because it makes them feel better about themselves.

I have no idea what you are talking about at this point. You literally admitted to not being able to mentally handle my points and that they were bad for your mental health.

I'm curious what you think my point is, that's it's so eldritch and terrible its causing you 8d6 psychological damage.

Cuz I seriously don't think my take is even a hot take, it's wild how I'll write what I perceive to be pretty basic "don't be a dick" logic and people will be like "whooaaa hey now we got a psycho over here, hey this dude thinks parents shouldn't treat their kids like objects, what the fuck right?"

W i l d

I think the reason experienced devs tend to have minimalist websites that look like they are from the 90s, is because software devs aren't UX experts.

At a senior level at large companies, someone else designs the look and figmas to make the site be pretty. I don't do that shit.

I can do some basic stuff as a front end dev, but react has nothing to do with css animations and all the stuff you typically associate with a "pretty" website.

Reactive frameworks are just handy for updating the dom on a mutatable website (ie forms, web socket stuff, data in out, pulling data from a db)

Blogs tend to be statically generated so there should be zero reason to use reactive frameworks anyways, unless you add something dynamic like perhaps a comment box folks can login to and leave comments/likes/shares etc. Loading those comments will prolly want a framework.

Aside from that, it's mostly css to do fancy stuff.

Anyone noticed how Trumps legal plan has a lot of weird overlap with Sovereign Citizens?

Dudes repeatedly having to be told "you can't just declare immunity mate" so he goes on Truth Social and malds about how unfair it is.

Edmonton, AB.

265k, 2 bed, 1.5 bath, unfinished basement, no garage, definitely a bot of a fixer (has a lot of landlord specials left behind we had to put work into fixing up)

Took a year and a half to save up the down payment + nest egg at ~$700/month set aside by cutting out a lot of expenses and living sorta frugal. No mcdonalds, no buying fun stuff, meal prepping, canceling subscriptions, etc etc.

We were at the time making a total of 70k combined before taxes. We could've prolly saved even more but we didn't want to go full peasant mode, lol.

I also had a large chunk of crypto from many years prior (~12k value at the time we signed the mortgage) I could've dipped into if needed, but we actually never needed to sell out that for the house and I wanted to keep holding it.

Good thing I didn't give in and sell, because a year later that 12k turned into 22k and I used that to substantially improve the home and build my makerspace in the basement, as well as build my garden in the back.

The house is definitely got a lot of... character... but I'm very happy with it and I don't need or want a bigger home. It's small with a big yard which means less space to clean, and all the fixing stuff keeps me busy.

I could do with less electrical issues though, prior owners didn't seem to give a shit about proper wiring work and I've had to basically re-install every switch and plug in the house. Also went on a fun adventure pulling ethernet through the attic to got modern wired gigabit internet delivered to key points in the house so everything didn't have to use wifi. Added security cameras, a PoE switch and server rack in the basement, and got air conditioning installed recently too.

House feels like a home now, and that's what matters.

Everytime this topic comes up, the absolute inundation of people willing to proudly demonstrate their vital lack of reading comprehension and math skills is fantastic.

People are just way more interested in being mad and blaming their problems on everything else, to the degree they will proudly post examples supporting exactly what I have said and proceed to act like they just proved me wrong and really got one over on me.

After many years of this, it's such a common occurrence I'm shocked when anything otherwise happens.

Feels b4 reals, as always.

People just wanna be mad about shit, but they direct their anger at the wrong shit (I assume this is intentional redirection at times though, better to get all the idiots malding at ghosts so they don't notice the actual causes of their issues)

Opposite.

The examples literally count as supporting exactly what I said.

It's not complicated.

If you use budgeting software and truly can't find any highlighted costs you can actually cut, and despite that can't afford to save money, then you have my sympathy, that sounds shitty and challenging.

My point is and continues to be if you complain about cost of living but you don't use freely available budgeting tools, I won't sympathize with you (yet), because every grown adult should just be doing that. It's a basic part of life and being an adult that people just don't bother doing.

Itd be the equivalent of someone complaining their car doesn't work but then admitting they've never checked their oil.

If you talk to any financial advisor, having a budget system is always step 1, so if a person hasnt dine that yet, their complaints just sound like whining to me as the person hasn't even done the absolute bare minimum step 1 yet to try and address or even understand the problem.

I assume such a person doesn't want to put any work in to get out of the hole they dug themselves into.

IF they do have a budget and their costs simply are just that bad, and they've already cut every single cost they can, then they have my sympathy as that means they actually are trying.

But unfortunately, after working with a LOT of people in various industries who complain about these issues, it has become abundantly clear that most people just want to complain and not actually do anything about it, and just keep wasting money.

I don't know your situation, but I've worked with so many people and so so so few of them even could hold a convo about budgeting, let alone talk about what tool(s) they use and tracking solutions they leverage.

So I now, after many many years of seeing how awful everyone seems to be at budgeting, just assume the average person is completely incompetent when it comes to managing money as the default.

For every 1 person I meet who has preferred budgeting tools, I have met dozens and dozens that couldn't even explain what a tax bracket actually means or is.

So I just assume the average person is at that level for finances. No hate, it's just facts that most people just... don't know or care to know how money works, they have other priorities in life, like family and their jobs and hobbies, /shrug

Have you ever even bought a place?

I have, I bought a quite recently.

While shopping, homes we looked at had been on market for awhile, and there was no such case of what you described. We actually got our house for 15k under listed, as we found a couple minor issues we brought up to get the tag knocked down during inspection.

There continue to still be houses for sale in the area at reasonable prices, I've seen some take weeks on end to sell.

And I never found the prices listed on realty sites to be off from actual sale.

That sucks mate, the US Healthcare system is fucked.

$700/month in savings is very solid though, and that's after paying off existing loans as part of our budget.

During the year abd a half we saved, we only ate out a couple times total? Our anniversary and Christmas. Maybe on my birthday too IIRC.

So yes indeed, while saving money you diont waste it on frivolous stuff like eating out, that is 100% correct and very normal.

That does sound a lot easier, making assumptions about people and not bothering to read what they wrote sounds like it makes it easier to sleep at night, knowing there's zero possibility you maybe were just mistaken about something.

They’re doing basic math and laughing at how their real world adult ass jobs still won’t pay for shit.

Sounds like they are bad at math then, or budgeting.

You sound salty. What budgeting software do you use, out of curiosity? I find without auto import support for my transactions and debt tracking, it felt way more challenging to get my finances in lime to save up.

I swapped to Mint at the time (though it's shutting down now RIP) and having that ability to see every penny we were spending lined up really helped a lot in terms of tightening the budget up to improve our ability to save.

We squeezed another $300/month out of our budget, pushing us up from $400/month to $700/month and that effectively halved our time to hit out goal.

There's just so much random shit people seriously don't think about as expenses adding up. My quick energy drink I'd often grab with a snack in the morning otw to work barely registered on my radar, but it was $5 or whatever a day, 3-4 days a week, which adds up to nearly 90 bucks monthly.

Just ordering a bulk box of energy drinks instead and remembering to grab it otw out the door was saving me like $50 a month.

If you don't have specific budgeting tools installed and actively used, you don't really have a leg to stand on (yet) when complaining about cost of living.

Go start there, run the numbers and import your last couple months transactions, and if you truly can't see a few hundred bucks a month you can squeeze than I can sympathize with ya.

This is a valid concern, and it's true you can measure QoL on a variety of different metrics.

I'd be really curious to know by what the infant mortality rate is so high in the US specifically, what's killing them by comparison?

Cuz I know their Healthcare statement isn't great but still, it's hard to imagine it's doing that bad, is another factor at play? Their poverty isn't bad enough to explain it, and I dunno if gun violence plays a huge role for infant deaths (child and teen deaths though, absolutely)

What's the cutoff for infant? Old enough for guns to start factoring in, cuz that's a serious issue on its own as well.

How close to the centre? I find near the centre of cities the prices become hyper inflated aggressively, but slightly outside that wtf zone the hyperinflation wears off fast and prices go back to being sane just 1 step out from the centre.

I can understand that price if it's downtown near the core, but outside of that sounds like a scam.

The same here out west is like 200k if not downtown. Downtown the price can shoot up to 1mil but it's largely a scam and inflated. Drive like 10min out and the price drops pretty fast and out in the suburbs you can get 2 bedroom houses for less than your condo cost.

Looking it up, Montreal itself has about a dozen or two 2bed homes for 200k-300k that are in good shape, but in that "non core" ring.

And as soon as I expand out to include nearby towns within 45 minutes you get literally like a hundred+ hits that all look solid.

Looks like starters are around 250k to 275k within 30min of the center, and then drop down to 225k if you expand out to 45min.

Very reasonable price, a smidge on the high side but definitely way lower than "400k for a condo"

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/26284331/5445-rue-de-la-l%C3%A9gion-longueuil-saint-hubert-orchard

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/26332130/240-rue-des-terrasses-saint-marc-sur-richelieu

https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/25733996/12-rue-de-lesp%C3%A9rance-saint-charles-sur-richelieu

Two of those are even 3bed houses. So yeah, your numbers are either bullshit, or your condo is near the city centre and way inflated compared to the rest of the city.

Or you got scammed.

it should be a normal-sized house that ordinary people can afford.

If you factor in renting prices in the range, the median household price drops way down and is around that mark, potentially lower.

The median house price alone when you chop off the entire rental market from the graph will never be that, because you effectively bias the number heavily upward by chopping off the entire lower portion of the data, biasing it upwards.

Rentals+Owning will have a median cost of living that aligns with the median income of the area.

But on average renting is cheaper than owning, so when you chop off and ignore that entire (very large) portion of the market, it's no surprise your median jumps up.

It's literally slightly less than half the entire market one ignores. Don't get fooled by it.

Comparing median house price to median income is an instant "doesn't know how housing economy works" flag.

Those properties are all a fair bit on the large side as well, and are in extremely good quality.

The first link is a smaller home but on a large property and literally dead center of Portland on highly valuable land, so that's an instant cherry pick.

The second is absolutely a mcmansion at 3000sqft, well over double the size of a starter home which usually ranges in the ~1500 range. Substantially more than anyone needs as a starter. It's in the suburbs but a quick glance shows you basically everyone has RVs and boats parked on their properties. The house is incredibly good condition and looks newly fully renovated. Several tiers above a starter home by a large margin, it's bizarre you thought thus house supported your argument. This is literally a textbook mcmansion.

The third is insane that you thought to even link it. Clocking in at nearly 3x the size of a starter home, double car garage, also newly renovated, and fairly close to the center of Gillette as well. This is less a mcmansion and just a huge bilevel. At what point did you seriously think that this house did anything other than support my statement, clocking in at that kind of Sq ft and with that location?

This is exactly as I wrote and you've done nothing but confirm, that the "median" house prices are many tiers above a starter home and only a fool thinks these are the houses first time home buyers will be saving up for.

Next time when you wanna try and find houses that aren't affluent, maybe take the five seconds to notice the literal sailboats parked in people's driveways? It's a pretty big tell lol

Math is a universal truth, not an experience.

I've yet to see a SINGLE person on this thread provide any concrete examples of locations that truly are as bad as people claim.

And as always, if it starts with using the "average" or "median" household price, reminder that that's the price of a small mansion, not a starter home, starter home and median home are mutually exclusive.

Median home is the 50% mark, starter homes are closer to the 20% or lower mark. So you're starting things off about doubled of actual home prices you'd be looking at.

Median vehicle price is a brand new sports car off the lot, remember that. You wouldn't look at brand new sports cars as the price for your first car, would you? That's what happens when you use the "median" or "average" price.l as your baseline.