AWS works with multiple availability zones (AZ) per region, some products by default deploy in several ones at the same time, while others leave it up to you.
Try textverified, you can even pay in crypto for legit unused numbers
Though I don't know if they are somehow blacklisted by Google. And the main service is just a one time verification rental but you can also rent a number for a few days.
Now do the salary comparison between an PM + SDE in California vs Germany.
Then taxes[1].
"As shown in the figure, the overall tax burden on wages is roughly 17% higher in Germany than in the U.S. While social security contributions (employer and employee) account for less than half of the U.S. wage tax burden, they account for more than two-thirds in Germany."
Now add cost of private insurance, COL, cost of houses. Then calculate how much of those pesky taxes in Germany go towards real infrastructure compared to the US.
I'm a FAANG engineer in Europe and I can tell you I'm not a lower class grunt like you imply everyone in here ;)
What I mean is that your reality may not be same as OP.
Some stages in life are better in Europe other are in US.
I lived in Both.
Want to live hard and play hard? Having two weeks vacations as a good thing? Go to US.
Want to drive YOUR car, have YOUR house fill the tank and eat bad food? US.
Want to have more 2 children, have 30 days + sick leave and well .. work slow? Go to Europe.
Europe is like a cozy trap, you enter, feels nice public transportation, healthcare, all things already decided for you and cozy.
But then you are on your 60's the Medical specialist has a long queue, your treatments are limited.
Then the state is telling you which doctor you should go, which treatment is good for you, etc.
Then You don't feel so good to bring groceries on the public transport.
Then You don't feel so connected to the local culture.
I am not doing a US VS Germany thread. But OP should looks in how he "fits" on each place.
Some people discover that food can be delicious, cheap and healthy in Europe.
Other people discover the power of individualism in US.
Are you going to fit on local culture or be in the expat circle?
Are your kids be in the local school or the "new school" made for new people?
As you are happy please enjoy real food and join me in the war against "olive garden" The "real italian food" from others food chains that claim it :)
> Want to drive YOUR car, have YOUR house fill the tank and eat bad food? US.
Weird, I have a house and a car, might have missed the memo about giving it away
> Europe is like a cozy trap, you enter, feels nice public transportation, healthcare, all things already decided for you and cozy.
I forgot when the government sent me my letter telling that I should study programming and in which city to live
> But then you are on your 60's the Medical specialist has a long queue, your treatments are limited. Then the state is telling you which doctor you should go, which treatment is good for you, etc.
Then you go and acquire private insurance or go to the private doctor of your choice. (like the US doesn't treat the elderly like crap)
> Then You don't feel so good to bring groceries on the public transport.
Don't need to bring groceries in public transport thanks to sane zoning regulations that allow blocks to have supermarkets and small shops, no need to give Ford your money to have a live and be able to buy groceries 7 KM away from your home :)
> Then You don't feel so connected to the local culture.
Like his german wife will in the US right?
> Other people discover the power of individualism in US.
I forgot the US copyrighted individualism
> Are you going to fit on local culture or be in the expat circle?
Again, like his wife?
> Are your kids be in the local school or the "new school" made for new people?
Clearly you don't know how schools work, neither in the US or EU.
You clearly don't have any knowledge of live in Europe and have a very naive sense of patriotism for the States
I'm just saying that's all I've seen him do to address the issue other than lip service. Obviously it's not going to solve things by itself.
Personally, I don't like or want any of the "solutions", not really (new pipelines, facilities, more fracking, more oil production, encourage poor Americans to buy expensive EV cars they can't afford, it all sucks).
All of this shit is basically turning the opposite direction from where we need to head towards for climate goals, and I hate it. But I also know people as a whole don't give a shit, and will punish whoever is in power if they're hurting enough come election time (and it does seem like a lot of people are legit suffering from the high gas and food prices).
At least for the midterms, Democrats look like they're fucked, and their general attitude of "Shrug, we can't change the status quo because of that one bad man Manchin, oh well, guess we'll do nothing" means they probably deserved it, as much as I'd hate to go back to Republican Congress of "fuck the environment, cut taxes for the rich, and turn back the clock on all progress" overall agenda.
EDIT: Actually I forgot there's something that Biden could be pushing for and is pushing for the opposite instead - encouraging/incentivizing corporations to keep/switch their staff to WFH, but instead he encouraged (during the State of the Union address even) everyone to go back into the office. Making more people WFH would cut down on demand for gas and might lower the gas prices at least somewhat, but no, it's more important to "return to normalcy" so fuck that, keep encourage everyone to use as much gas as possible.
It recently leaked that the Irish government have a plan to force more WFH if their fuel situation gets worse[1], so it's not like this has no precedent elsewhere.
> guess we'll do nothing" means they [Democrats] probably deserved it
To use an Americanism, “all y’all” don’t deserve it, but you’re the ones who will suffer while the people you elect will, by and large, float on.
Personally, I think most Americans are generally good people who’d just like to get along, having adequate empathy to support basic human rights and basic social welfare systems. If more voted, everyone would be better off. Mind, getting more people involved in primaries is probably necessary, because the parties as-is are not representative of the people: they’re representative of decades old internal power struggles. All y’all need new, fresh representatives.
I found most of your complains either false or non issue:
1. Ok, maybe a bug.
2. Given that is a mobile game and most people will no have the volume up, it is ok to have subtitles. Not to mention that games that start with subtitles are more accessible and the majority of players actually don't mind them and find them useful.
3. Fair, but given that this is a mobile game, V-sync can be a problem for lower end devices too.
4. False? I cleared the first mission and had no prompt for that and has not requested tracking at all. Android.
5. The hell you talking about? When you start you get a small cut scene and are given full control when they drop you off the ship.
6. The game is mostly online for what I can tell so updates are a given (and you can download areas separately)
The game literally removes the controls while you're being told how they work. They vanish. You can't do anything but sit there patiently while a game character lectures you about how a joystick works.
What next? "To use a key on your keyboard, apply sufficient downwards pressure that you hear a 'click'. Do this now!"
It's patronising to a level that I feel insulted and leave the game immediately.
Compare to the height of the PC game era -- which Blizzard games used to be the epitome of -- you get "dropped" into the game and you learn through discovery instead of an unskippable presentation.
The intro of Half Life is a classic example of how to do this well. This is the opposite of that.
Perhaps permission was not asked because permission was previously granted.
Example: every time I use Google maps it asks me to turn on location tracking, many people never encounter this because they leave location tracking on.
Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.
As long as the game doesn't clearly lie (e.g. telling a lootbox does something that it doesn't) everybody knows what a lootbox is. Playing the game is a voluntary action taken by an individual, just like going to a casino. They are responsible for their own actions, and blocking a certain demographics' (e.g. people in Netherlands) to access to a game/mechanics (e.g. Diablo Immortal + lootboxes) is fundamentally against people's freedom of choosing to play a game or not.
It's their money, they can spend $1m if they want to, on lootboxes.
Would I? Definitely not. But blocking someone who does want to from doing it, whereas it doesn't have negative effects to society (e.g. Doesn't affect anyone but the person themselves) is ridiculous.
> Playing the game is a voluntary action taken by an individual, just like going to a casino.
The same argument can be made for other regulated activities like drinking alcohol or smoking (whether you agree or not, that's how it is in a lot of places today). Those are voluntary activities too.
> whereas it doesn't have negative effects to society
Addiction _does_ have negative effects on society, which is why these rules get introduced. It looks like this ban [1] is enforcement of gambling laws, because the loot is transferrable it's deemed to have value. I'm curious in this case to know how much of an impact banning these particular games actually has though.
>
Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.
In theory, humans are rational, and in theory, spherical cows are an excellent basis for economics.
Human brains have bugs, and these industries exploit them. It's predatory, and utterly reprehensible.
Human brains have bugs, and anyone going into a casino or a pay-to-win games know what they are going into. (If they don't that's their problem for not doing their own research and using common sense before putting their money)
Human brains also have a bug around sugar consumption. I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.
Human brains also have a bug making many of them social media addicts.
Human brains have so many bugs. At the end of the day regulating these businesses will hurt more people who voluntarily want to be involved than saving potential addicts.
The real solution is never preventing people from doing things (of course as long as they affect only the person and not the others' rights), instead, it's educating.
If those governments placed their efforts into educating the people about addiction mechanics of those games/casinos etc. instead of blocking/regulating altogether, it would be much more beneficial than blocking people from their own decisions.
> Human brains have bugs, and anyone going into a casino or a pay-to-win games know what they are going into. (If they don't that's their problem for not doing their own research and using common sense before putting their money)
"It's OK if people's lives are intentionally ruined purely for corporate profits, so long as it's at least partly those people's fault. They shouldn't let themselves be tricked."
> Human brains also have a bug around sugar consumption. I've yet to see selling people sugar or sugar-containing foods/beverages being regulated.
By the way, San Francisco taxes sugary drinks and requires them to have a warning label.
> The real solution is never preventing people from doing things (of course as long as they affect only the person and not the others' rights), instead, it's educating.
These approaches are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps it's best to find a balance between them?
You emphasize personal responsibility, but most of the world doesn't have that on the top of their societal values[0]. And one person's problematic gambling, as any other addiction, definitely impacts others, similar to how substance abuse or any other addiction really[1].
This is like saying people ought to be free to sell meth on the corner because you are smart enough to avoid addiction. Societies have good reason to ban things that are a net negative to society.
There is an argument for decriminalizing drug possession. The same argument in no way holds for drug dealing. The price would come down and availability would skyrocket as would the problems that stem from use.
> Casinos shouldn't be regulated too. If nobody is forcing anyone to attend into something (like going to a casino or playing a pay-to-win game) nobody should have the right to change or regulate the inner dynamics.
This is, of course, a position that is yours to hold. But I do hope that you recognize that it's quite a small, fringe one. It's a bit strange to use a fringe opinion about casino regulation as the stepping stone for an implication that loot boxes shouldn't be regulated.
Is there a consensus on the value of leadership? I know there is some research for and against the idea that executive leadership has a meaningful impact on value creation.
Tom Brady did actual work for his team, a CEO does not do $500M worth of work. If there were no employees other than the CEO then the $500M doesn't get made.
The decision to make AWS created 100s of billions of dollars of value. CEO decisions can make and break companies.
> If there were no employees other than the CEO then the $500M doesn't get made.
Right, and if Tom Brady doesn't have receivers to throw to he doesn't win any super bowls. It is the leadership that can create massive amounts of value.
> The decision to make AWS created 100s of billions of dollars of value
I can make decisions to create something all day, none of it makes any money unless effort is put into it's creation. Product and engineering and design made AWS which allowed the company to make billions. The marketing team after that.
And who was leading that effort? When executing, hard decisions get propagated to the top and leaders like Jassy have to make the toughest decisions that result in moving the trajectory of the company/project. This can create or destroy a lot of value.
He isn't being paid for his work (which I assume you are conflating with labor); he is being paid for the perceived value he can bring to the company.
His decision-making can absolutely influence the bottom line far more than any single Amazon warehouse worker could.
Now, I'm not saying that warehouse workers are worthless or should be treated like shit, far from it, but if Amazon doesn't pay him this much, some other corporation will. That's the free market.
There is also a small cluster of Venezuelans that will vote GOP because they have, historically, a harder stance on Cuba and the Dictatorship in Venezuela.
Funny how left leaning voters call out imperialism but forget that Cuba, Russia and China have been doing that in Venezuela the last 30 years
He seems so out of touch with reality, advocating for everything being free open source, specially games would have stopped many of the now cultural references that exists. Making games is hard, making good games is harder and needs a team both motivated and financially compensated.
He sure does but that still would form many issues with compensation as we have seen, many times, with open source companies. Everyone shouts red hat or something but that’s one exception; most other people who make Libre software, die of hunger under a bridge, or, more likely, have a day time job and simply will drop the Libre project when things get too busy. This is why companies now go from Libre to something quasi Libre to try to make money. There are some Libre (supabase for instance) projects now getting fairly large amounts of VC cash to get going, but once they have to ‘stand on their own legs’ usually pattern emerge that are not Libre to pay back (provide ROI to) the investors and then some.
I wish we would find a way to properly do this; I would insist on creating only Libre software, but for now, it is fairly random if it will make money while closed (saas) software is much more straight forward as in; if I have clients, I make money. With Libre software that I ask money for, I might have 100k stars and a lovely following while making no money at all.
I do not see this to be a pattern we will follow. We have a hosted offering which we earn revenue from.
The self-hosted offering always being free. All software is MIT, Apache2, or PostgreSQL licensed and we plan to keep it that way. We have the beneficial characteristic that we are a suite of tools, which limits the threat of competition from a cloud provider like AWS taking the software and offering it themselves. What would the offer from Supabase? Our Realtime server? PostgREST? The Dashboard? PostgreSQL? They already do. Our Postgres extensions? Hopefully they do, it will make it easier to run Supabase with RDS.
That is fantastic to hear; you are doing very good work. But history tells a story for most companies. I hope you keep it going; I might apply for a job!
But a game costs hundreds of millions of dollars to create. Just royalties to sports leagues etc can be massive, for a sports game for example.
RMS should work backwards from that assumption and explain how to get such games into gamers hands while maintaining freedom. If he can’t then he should probably give up arguing that people should stop playing or switch to something completely different than what they consider a “game” is.
No. A game does not cost hundreds of millions of dollars to create. Some games choose to burn hundreds of millions of dollars, for very little return. Some of the best games were a lot cheaper to produce. License costs are elective: Noone forces you to plaster Football players names and team logos on your Football game (and some of the best (and creative) Football games choose not to)
The main problem is that RMS lives in a world in which people care about freedom, when they only care about brand recognition - and that is in fact related to marketing and thus "millions of dollars".
> The main problem is that RMS lives in a world in which people care about freedom, when they only care about brand recognition - and that is in fact related to marketing and thus "millions of dollars".
There are other reasons than licensing and marketing that makes games cost hundreds of millions too. People expect games to be on the scale that they are, so the cost of developing these games will be astronomical.
It’s ok to care about freedoms of course but I don’t see how it’s a meaningful to argue that the most popular section of games should simply go extinct rather than work for making those more free or privacy conscious than they are.
Mobile games are popular on mobile. The medium is somewhat limited, but there at least there is still a theoretical chance you can develop a blockbuster without a massive bugdet.
> would AAA games be so popular without the millions spent on advertising?
Kind of a hypothetical, but I'm guessing yes. But to spend a billion on a game and then not tell anyone you did would be kind of silly. It's not like "advertising" or "marketing" is some kind of scam to get people to buy things they don't really like.
