AFAIK this fucks with artists, not Spotify.
Spotify doesn't pay artists a flat amount per stream. Instead, Spotify's profits are split between artists based on their streams. A single user heavily streaming is imperceptibly lowering 'revenue per stream' by increasing overall streams but only paying for one subscription.
By playing a bunch of songs, all you do is give those artists slightly more, and other artists slightly less – at least in theory. In practice you're probably not steaming enough to change overall percentages.
So if anything, you are moving profit to support the artists that Spotify is promoting by putting in your 'radio'. Which likely means instead of going to small undiscovered musicians, it goes towards popular established ones that Spotify assumes you'll like.
But since this is probably not enough to move those percentages, you're only messing up your own algorithm.
Where's us weirdos that like to eat 1-3 at a time by one sticking to our tongue like a frog
ESU is inherently bullshit. So they're going to make security upgrades for the OS millions of people are using, but you only get them if you pay? Even though they're committing dev time to make and deploy them, the SECURITY upgrades to the OS yhat millions have already paid for?
What a grift. Either you're paying ESU and there's no dev work (free moneyyy!) or it's literally a 'protection fee' for dev work they're doing anyway (nyeehhh nice PC ye got there, be a shame if we extorted you for it)
Oh, they're here. Our parking spaces aren't big enough for American cars, so they park as far back as the curb will let them – you can see their towballs lining the paths like tripmines.
Gor a chuckle out of a 'ute' with the empty bed pulling a trailer with the tradie's gear in it though. Awww, your two-cab lifestyle ute's open bed too small for a 2x4 there buddy?
While thats also true, Im talking about reading comprehension, not Poe's Law.
If you're using "s, it indicates that it's not something you're actually saying. You're quoting somebody else, including a hypothetical person that you're satirising. It's explicitly saying they're not your real words.
That's an issue of reading skill, and while we can certainly work to make writing more accessible for those that aren't great at it, I don't appreciate how people blame the writer for the treatment they receive for what is, at best, a mutual misunderstanding.
It's gotten bad enough that I can say in the comment the person I am satirising, and again in a concluding statement. But without the '/s', people still accuse me of being a monster for believing a heinous thing I deliberately used provocative language to describe.
This craps everywhere now man. A friend was looking up paint colours for her house for the biggest paint company in the country, and the one she chose was recommended to give her home a murky and rancid feel. Like at that point, don't give individual colours descriptions at all!
If those "s were already in your comment, you shouldn't have needed it :/ satire on the internet is getting harder to make I guess
That's just the money their making itself. When it comes down to what are we subscribing for, it keeps being ads again. They keep deciding that subscriptions make money by removing ads.
Like, why not subscriptions that actually add something gainful? Subscribe to stream your games to any TV, subscribe to get dog food delivered to your house monthly, subscribe to Socks of the Month Club. Those things exist in other industries, but tech?? Nope, it's just ads, or subscribe to less ads.
The entire movie is immersion therapy for those who suffer second-hand embarrassment.
Except one character that was genuinely fun. And a crack to the didgy-donch!
Are techbros so bland that they really can't think of literally any fucking way to make money that isn't just 'ads'?
Thank you, I'm not American but MS has so many 'features' that have been destroying my sanity, I will look into this tool when I'm back at my desktop 👍
If you're in the US,
Is it US specific, or do you just mean if you're not in the EU?
Very very few people in this world feel truly attractive, women included. Body image and self-esteem are almost universal problems. This is not your fault.
I suspect this is an issue of perspective. You desire women, so you believe you must be a woman to be desirable. And you desire them for their beauty, so you believe you must be beautiful. This is perspective, not objective truth. Neither has to be true of you. Only if you decide its the only option do you leave yourself with no option at all. At that point, you've decided failure for yourself.
If what you want is to feel desirable and you teuly are 'ugly' (whatever that means to you), your odds are better if you're attracted to women. In relationships, women more commonly value non-visible traits like communication, resilience, consideration, humour, and skill. Attraction is more holistic. I've known of at least two men getting married with almost no face at all (one taken off by a grizzly bear, the other obscured by large benign growths). Both had kids, too. In a healthy relationship, holistic desire grows.
You are thirsty in the desert, and that's awful. You fantasise about drowning in the lake because it looks like a solution to your problem, just as those drowning desperately wish they could stand on the solid cracked earth.
Oh, here we just call those ice blocks. As in, ALL of those are called ice blocks in Australia and New Zealand.
There are ice creams on a stick (eg Magnum) which are ice creams in a chocolate shell, but in your picture all those are all very clearly water-based ice blocks.
I'm reminded of someone I know. He felt something similar for a long time. Ultimately he concluded that, for him, what he really wanted was to feel attractive and desirable. And sincr he believed that only women could have that, he spend years conflicted about wanting to be a woman.
After some time around sex-positive people, he had experiences that helped him feel desirable and attractive as a man. He realised that was what he actually wanted, and he'd just been taught beauty was a women-thing and thought he had to be a woman to have it.
Maybe that rings true for you, too. Maybe all you really want is to feel beautiful, wanted, desired. Maybe want you dislike isn't your gender, but the role society has assigned you for it.
Only you can really figure that out. I just wondered if my friends story would mean something to you.. Being trans is a valid answer, but it isn't the right one for everybody.
I think snowcone if it's crushed ice with flavour syrup added (though Snowcone might be a brand name that Americans just use for all of them)
Or sorbet if it's frozen fruit puree
Was thinking of th giant ice block at first, forgot about them scooping health code violations
Tbh I also do this. While my body is in ketosis (eg just woke up) it's way easier to ignore food drive. The second I taste any good though, my body wakes up like "oh its FOOD time now??" and my appetite rages for the rest of the day.
It's risky to completely abstain for a long time though, because fat is only calories, not nutrient. You'll end up with a lot of deficiencies the longer you do it.
I recommend eating a proper meal every now and then, or at least do research on fasting and drink lots of water (prevent kidney stones) and take multivitamin supplements. Consider also asking to your doctor about what you're doing so they can inform you of risks and how to mitigate them
Women also use dating apps for their own reasons, too. While its true there are a lot of socially inept men on them, I'm uncomfortable with your phrasing. It seems to be blaming men (and not women) for the apps' existence.
Dating apps are mostly a reflection of a society with poor options for socialising organically. They're trying to get people connected in a world that makes organic meeting places increasingly expensive or rare, or work hours that are particularly long and limit our energy and free time.
The world is also increasingly hostile to the 'cold approach'. Dating apps are environments where men know they are allowed to interact with women, snd both can easily disengage from bad matches.That's especially crucial for the more gentle men that don't want to make women uncomfortable in the first place, since they would likely never cold approach, or feel uncomfortable admitting interest to their friends and acquaintances.
