Vent

Now show the top 0.01% as their own bar

� is used to represent an invalid character, so it makes sense that it'd appear often when bad data is being rendered (or good data is being rendered improperly).

They don't ban your account, they ban your switch. If your switch is caught, it won't be able to use any Nintendo services ever again. But your account would still work on other devices.

And for a free trial, no less! If this isn't laughed out of the courtroom and dismissed with prejudice, we're all screwed.

There are services that'll sell you a brand-new modded oled switch for less than £500. It's not exactly rare, any switch can be modded and a modchip is better than the OG joycon exploit since modchips are untethered.

I thought the real reason was that RCS was finally kicking off, but Google wasn't exposing an RCS api to normal apps. Signal never said that was the reason, but it was the only thing that made sense at the time.

Grep is as high power as vim and emacs??? In what universe?

They came to their “hugely alarming” conclusions after analysing the nutritional content of the 10 top-selling items bought at 19 of the UK’s biggest “out of home” outlets, including chains such as Subway, Pizza Express, McDonald’s, Greggs, Starbucks and Pret a Manger.

They only reviewed the 10 top-selling items at each chain. Headline could have read: "Breaking News: People Like Buying Comfort Food and Sugar"

Needs based support is definitely a good thing, but that's not what SS is. That's closer to welfare and would require a much deeper look into people's financial situation than a retirement program like SS.

I could make $500k/yr while working then experience some disaster/disability that takes it all away. Conversely, I could be homeless then suddenly come into massive wealth later in my life. Or, I could live a lavish life because my parents/SO are extremely wealthy, yet I am dirt poor on paper. SS is not designed for these situations, and attempting to modify it to fit them is probably a worse idea than bolstering other entitlement programs that are designed to fill in the gaps.

Wouldn't removing the cap just delay the issue? You get more out of SS the more you put in. The cap exists because there is a maximum amount you can get out of SS. If they remove the input cap, then that implies they'd remove the output cap too. In which case, the immediate result is a lot more money flowing into SS, but over time, a whole lot more money will start flowing out, too.

Outrage, yes, but what about decreased usage? What's the effect on revenue and stock price? C-suite pay?