punyearthling
- it's painful
- it's expensive
- it's a drag
- culture war stuff (who wants to deal with school issues, medical issues, community issues, etc.?)
Wish the post provided more screenshots to name and shame.
That being said, if a child is doing labour for a company (in this case Roblox, but the same could be said for Instagram, Tiktok, etc.), why is it considered more ethical to NOT pay that child for their work?
I know an argument could be made that adding financial incentives encourage more kids to participate in said child labour, but NOT paying them doesn't dissuade them from doing so.
And how is Roblox's practice different from the creator funds of social media sites that rely on user-generated content to justify their existence? It's all very murky to me.
I think my problem with this model is Roblox taking such a large cut from their workforce, not that they pay them at all.
I think bicyclists get the most grief here, mostly because cars don't like sharing the road and bikes tend to slow down traffic.
- go to the gym
- volunteer somewhere
- take classes on something you're interested in
- go to community events
these are just a handful of options i just thought of where you can interact with other ppl. filling your social life with a work life isn't the answer.
enabling shadow DOM renders that component completely inaccessible to users using assistive tech like screen readers. without a shadow DOM enabled, you lose the encapsulation benefit devs seem to love. js framework components, for all their faults, can at least be accessible.
i just don't think web components are quite there yet.
he tells me much of the pet care industry immitates the human care industry, e.g., fad diets and medical trends. i can't help but notice this whenever i go to a pet store now. the labeling on foods and the push for "CBD for pets" - can't help but feel the pet care companies co-opt marketing strategies for people
I see loads of comments in here using things like `.mb-sm-3` (I presume it's `margin-bottom: 3` for small screens?) as an example for how readable the classes are, but with CSS introducing logical properties I wonder if Tailwind's syntax needs to update to accommodate those changes? Using logical properties, this same example would render to `margin-block-end: 3` and already you're moving away from the easy-to-remember shorthand Tailwind created. If Tailwind's syntax needs to update, isn't that a pain in the ass to maintain?
This is just one example, but CSS is introducing loads of new stuff every few months it seems and I would hate to be limited by the constraints of a CSS library when browsers are capable of achieving so much these days. I enjoy learning CSS, not Tailwind.
For folks complaining of headaches or eye strain, browsers come equipped with forced-colors mode that enable you to choose your preferred color scheme.
But as they got older, they got annoyed by more sounds, usually mouth related. My dad's clicking jaw, someone eating chips at a birthday party, a baby talking gibberish at a restaurant, etc. If my sibling hears a sound they find annoying, you'll be sure to get a dirty look, screamed at, or they'll burst into tears. Sometimes it's all the above. I won't visit my sibling anymore because of their problem.
As unpleasant as it sounds, you have to desensitize yourself to these sounds. The more you avoid it, the more intolerable it gets.