For warehouse positions, at least a decade ago, "hiring events" consisted of showing up with a valid driver's license. I think they did a background check. No interview. Boom, you've got a job.
They effectively have an infinite labor supply and have everything structured to be incredibly resistant to what little room there is for error.
So is this (unfortunately the comment was edited to what it says now after Cranston responded to it).
Don't get me started. I've got trauma from an ex's careful manipulation that happened over four and a half years. Multiple times during when I truly thought I was losing my mind.
It took years afterwards for me to feel I could have any baseline trust in my own memory and my own interpretations of other people, because how in the hell could I have been so wrong about the ex? How could I have been so blind to so much manipulation, that with the right puzzle pieces in place and the benefit of hindsight is now so obvious?
It's been more than a decade, and still when I'm challenged on my recollection of events, I tend to default to not trust myself.
I sincerely don't want anyone to know the meaning of gaslighting first hand like I do. At the same time, I wish people would stop overusing strong specific words when describing more "regular" banal bad stuff.
Please spare me whatever philosophical navel gazing you're trying to do here. I'm asking what should be an incredibly straightforward question about what should be basic functionality in any P2P seeding based system:
What control, if any, does an individual user have over what they seed back into the system?
Some P2P systems just give each user an encrypted blob of all sorts of stuff, so the individual user can't choose and on paper isn't responsible for whatever it is that they are seeding back in. I'm personally not ok with not having a way to ensure that I'm not seeding nazi manifestos that were stealthing as a reasonably named subplebbit.
Holy shit you cannot be serious. In the shortest possible terms: trust systems are forms of moderation. Anything implementing them would not fall under what I was talking about.
This project doesn't appear to implement that. It doesn't even appear to have a bare minimum way for users to prevent themselves from sharing something they viewed but don't want to share. Viewing something should not imply trust.
Definitely appreciate the assumption that I'm just a dumbass and you've come to shine the light of enlightenment on me though. That my point of view could only be possible to reach through ignorance. That's always nice.
How are users able to decide what they seed and what they don't? Just because I viewed something doesn't mean I necessarily want to support its proliferation.
I bring this point up every time I see someone pushing the idea of P2P or federated social networks with no moderation and no one has a solution for it yet. Because there isn't a solution.
It's like these people don't even want to look at existing social media with minimal moderation. It doesn't take long on 4chan and other less reputable *chan style sites to see that no matter how much you want to shake off the chains of overbearing moderators, there is a bare minimum moderation necessary for any social media to survive.
Even social media sites on TOR have moderation.
When even the darkest, least moderated cesspools online still have some minimal moderation, it should be a massive neon sign that there needs to be some moderation functionality.
There's probably also an assumption that it's a soft core porn game, or at least going for sex appeal. Most mobile games marketing themselves on images of anime women are, when you get down to it.
That was my assumption when I saw this post. "Oh great, another anime waifu game where the characters breast boobily along." Complete assumption, but usually a safe one when it comes to mobile games I've never heard of that market themselves via pictures of anime women.
So when someone uses random sludge instead of ink and breaks the printer they can point at that as the cause.
It's basic CYA. They'll let you do whatever you want, but if something goes wrong and it breaks then you're on your own.
I hate to be an albatross around your neck, but it would serve you well to seek out opportunities to practice and hone your social skills. There's definitely a wide variety of neurodivergence in the IT groups in my workplace, but you may have screwed yourself in terms of an opportunity to further build coping/masking skills that are sadly necessary in the workplace.
A commom refrain in many online spaces for experienced software devs and IT workers is that the job requires significantly more soft/social skills than most people are adequately prepared for by their studies. This also matches my personal experience coming up towards year 10 in IT, year 5 as a Systems Engineer/Admin/Scripting Monkey.
Not really the internet, but I remember Dr. Oz being a daytime TV show that was full of quackery delivered as though it was coming from an expert.
Emigrate?