Apparently a brick in the mouth is what's needed to prevent vampires from rising again. Or maybe a blade over the neck. Honestly, let's compile a complete list and try them all just to be sure.
I don't disagree with you, to be very very clear, but I find it fascinating how radically things have changed since I was a kid (and I'm just a millennial). We were flooded with messaging, left over from a time when highschool was the last step for most before the job market, about how highschool was where kids became adults. How many films from that time hype sexualized high schoolers?
I disagree actually. If you think this is what wealthy people decorate like in either era, you haven't been around rich people.
For the movie set, you can't forget that set and the photography of it is designed to help push the message of the movie and a sense of realism is rarely a priority. With the realty photos, they are marketing first, they want to emphasize a clean, neutral setting that is full of potential.
It is also important to remember that this grey aesthetic arose from the concrete homes that were in vogue with the rich in the 2010s. Those homes were grey, yes, but they also emphasized textures, unusual materials, and lighting. The home photographed here is clearly middle class because it has none of what made concrete homes interesting.
I could write an entire essay on this, but I think I have made my point. The only comparison that matters here is that both sets of photos are fantasy. One is literally a movie set, the other is an advertisement. Neither capture any sort of reality about rich people or even people. It is silly to say that the movie set looks lived in as an example. They are both, however, what middle class people imagine rich people are like.
Edit: And before anyone says it, yes, I'm sure some rich person somewhere decorated like that. The McAllister home is a real place after all, but it doesn't negate that we are seeing what the director wants us to experience first.
The thing is that the 90s shots are from a movie, the others are from a property listing. They have very different purposes. A movie needs to be visually interesting. A property listing needs to be as neutral as possible so people aren't put off by the house before even looking at it.
This isn't a "lot" of time, but I spent 19 ish hours to complete Under the Island. I don't want to be harsh on an Indie game, but the game let me down so badly. I wanted a Zelda-like and this had some really interesting ideas. It was just that everything between the ideas was terrible. The plot was predictable and boring. Characters weren't. The mini games were some of the worst I have ever seen. Navigation was obnoxious and often relied on the top down perspective hiding the REQUIRED path with little to no indication that you could walk "through" an obstacle. I could go on.
Why did I play it through? I just kept hoping that everything would live up to the interesting ideas. It did not.
I'd never be able to find it, but back in the Vanilla days, there was an interview where one of the designers literally explained that flying was a bad idea and would ruin the game for the exact reasons it did. They knew, but someone must have overruled that.
I agree they should have barriers on getting access to your email, but, and I'm sure you know this on some level, the way email works and can bounce around across multiple servers before landing in your provider's systems, all in plain text, means you should never rely on email for privacy unless you are encrypting it. I just run on the assumption that copies of all of my emails exist somewhere.
I found you need to tailor the questions a bit more to their question and enter their frame as much as possible.
Daddy, why are there police?
Well, that's a good question, what do you think police do?
Put bad guys in jail.
Hrm... Well, do you remember the movie we saw last month with the sheep? (Sheep Detectives it is very good and everyone should watch it.) Was the spoiler a bad guy?
No.... But they did arrest them. Why?
And then we slowly work through a conversation about policing without going too deep into the details.
What you'll discover is that there is often a very weird something behind the question. It is often as important to understand what that thing is as it is to answer the questions. The problem is that you can't directly ask that lest they shut down.
The problem is that a question like, "how can the floor" might be related in the kiddos mind to something as seemingly unrelated as "why did we eat hamburgers last week?" and if you go down the wrong path, suddenly your kid has a link between hamburgers and orbital motion that doesn't necessarily link up in any real logical way.
My approach is not to just answer questions, but to help them think through their questions and how they might answer them. No clue if that works.
If you think that this is a broken system and not working exactly as intended, you are delusional. The system serves many purposes including: making it harder to leave your job, thus suppressing wage growth, making candidates less likely to negotiate or leverage multiple offers, thus suppressing wage growth, and making it easier to argue that they "just can't fill" their ghost jobs and must outsource or import labor, thus suppressing wage growth.
For reference, we posted a job for 48 hours and got nearly 20k applications. Most were AI garbage, but there is no way a person could have gone through those in any reasonable time.
For me, the key to dealing with the vertical tabs was to set the tab bar to auto hide. I'd still prefer horizontal tabs, but at least I get the space back.
Actually, in this case, unless they are... refilling... the hostages each run, the results of previous runs do affect each additional run. Unless you feel that running someone over the second time kills them a second time.
Apparently a brick in the mouth is what's needed to prevent vampires from rising again. Or maybe a blade over the neck. Honestly, let's compile a complete list and try them all just to be sure.
I don't disagree with you, to be very very clear, but I find it fascinating how radically things have changed since I was a kid (and I'm just a millennial). We were flooded with messaging, left over from a time when highschool was the last step for most before the job market, about how highschool was where kids became adults. How many films from that time hype sexualized high schoolers?
I disagree actually. If you think this is what wealthy people decorate like in either era, you haven't been around rich people.
For the movie set, you can't forget that set and the photography of it is designed to help push the message of the movie and a sense of realism is rarely a priority. With the realty photos, they are marketing first, they want to emphasize a clean, neutral setting that is full of potential.
It is also important to remember that this grey aesthetic arose from the concrete homes that were in vogue with the rich in the 2010s. Those homes were grey, yes, but they also emphasized textures, unusual materials, and lighting. The home photographed here is clearly middle class because it has none of what made concrete homes interesting.
I could write an entire essay on this, but I think I have made my point. The only comparison that matters here is that both sets of photos are fantasy. One is literally a movie set, the other is an advertisement. Neither capture any sort of reality about rich people or even people. It is silly to say that the movie set looks lived in as an example. They are both, however, what middle class people imagine rich people are like.
Edit: And before anyone says it, yes, I'm sure some rich person somewhere decorated like that. The McAllister home is a real place after all, but it doesn't negate that we are seeing what the director wants us to experience first.
The thing is that the 90s shots are from a movie, the others are from a property listing. They have very different purposes. A movie needs to be visually interesting. A property listing needs to be as neutral as possible so people aren't put off by the house before even looking at it.
Two completely different genres of photography.
This isn't a "lot" of time, but I spent 19 ish hours to complete Under the Island. I don't want to be harsh on an Indie game, but the game let me down so badly. I wanted a Zelda-like and this had some really interesting ideas. It was just that everything between the ideas was terrible. The plot was predictable and boring. Characters weren't. The mini games were some of the worst I have ever seen. Navigation was obnoxious and often relied on the top down perspective hiding the REQUIRED path with little to no indication that you could walk "through" an obstacle. I could go on.
Why did I play it through? I just kept hoping that everything would live up to the interesting ideas. It did not.
I'd never be able to find it, but back in the Vanilla days, there was an interview where one of the designers literally explained that flying was a bad idea and would ruin the game for the exact reasons it did. They knew, but someone must have overruled that.
Relevant: https://youtu.be/gFjKPLc5qD0
I agree they should have barriers on getting access to your email, but, and I'm sure you know this on some level, the way email works and can bounce around across multiple servers before landing in your provider's systems, all in plain text, means you should never rely on email for privacy unless you are encrypting it. I just run on the assumption that copies of all of my emails exist somewhere.
I found you need to tailor the questions a bit more to their question and enter their frame as much as possible.
And then we slowly work through a conversation about policing without going too deep into the details.
What you'll discover is that there is often a very weird something behind the question. It is often as important to understand what that thing is as it is to answer the questions. The problem is that you can't directly ask that lest they shut down.
The problem is that a question like, "how can the floor" might be related in the kiddos mind to something as seemingly unrelated as "why did we eat hamburgers last week?" and if you go down the wrong path, suddenly your kid has a link between hamburgers and orbital motion that doesn't necessarily link up in any real logical way.
My approach is not to just answer questions, but to help them think through their questions and how they might answer them. No clue if that works.
If you think that this is a broken system and not working exactly as intended, you are delusional. The system serves many purposes including: making it harder to leave your job, thus suppressing wage growth, making candidates less likely to negotiate or leverage multiple offers, thus suppressing wage growth, and making it easier to argue that they "just can't fill" their ghost jobs and must outsource or import labor, thus suppressing wage growth.
And, if you actually do this, you can poke a small hole in the foil and create a camera obscura!
I never watched the Goosebumps TV show, was it any good?
Tech job at a mid sized company.
For reference, we posted a job for 48 hours and got nearly 20k applications. Most were AI garbage, but there is no way a person could have gone through those in any reasonable time.
Well, yes, of course, but the context here was the evil kind of cookies.
For me, the key to dealing with the vertical tabs was to set the tab bar to auto hide. I'd still prefer horizontal tabs, but at least I get the space back.
Unfortunately, cookies are passé now. Have fun:
Am I Unique
Since You Arrived
I think browsers need to start fighting back with fake intelligence.
Actually, in this case, unless they are... refilling... the hostages each run, the results of previous runs do affect each additional run. Unless you feel that running someone over the second time kills them a second time.