Honestly McDonald's is one of the worst foods you can eat and there are few places in the UK you can't order it, so as far as making the food options worse for kids.. eh I don't see it either.

Some of the arguments are good in the article, e.g. the places where there are multiple dark kitchens sharing the same place and equipment, ensuring allergy requirements are followed for each seems hard.

That being said there is actually an issue with them which is not really mentioned (and it's as much an issue with the delivery apps). They can be listed as available without a food safety certification. It shows in most of the apps, but it's only if you actually look for it really. It makes it so easy to just create a new digital storefront and sell crap. Maybe your reviews bomb in 3-4 weeks enough that people stop ordering, but hey just make a new one from the same place and you're back in business.

I've found these places can be rather annoying in smaller towns (I live in one now), but not really a big deal in cities cuz there are so many options there. There are about 4 "different" burger places here on the apps that are the same place (same items on the menu but different names, same pictures even, same address listed, very similar prices) and it's inedible - there's a separate group of 3-4 for Mexican food, same situation. They did pretty much what I described above, one showed up, it was shit, lasted a few months and it's now at 3 stars or similar then another "new" one showed up and followed the same path and so on. It's too easy to sign up as a "restaurant".

It also makes it kind of an exercise to order from a new place and have to investigate if it's gonna be just the same garbage or if it's a genuine new place.

I think the solution would be forcing the apps the confirm a food certification with a business name matching it before allowing them to sell food. It'd help with the renaming, and also with the food safety concerns.

The UK is not part of the EU. The lawsuit is not by the UK (or the EU), it's just in the UK court.

Luckily, the focus is on the important things. The government doesn't have the resources to help the people who can't afford to eat, when there are such problems still around as kids using social media.

Somehow food and shelter doesn't seem to make it into the "protect the kids" bills they push..

/s, just in case

I think 75% is apt here, tailwind is incredibly popular and most people wouldn't know how many engineers they have. If it said "tailwind let 3 people go" I bet most (including me) would assume alright.. tailwinds big they may have 30-50 people around.. 3 is not too bad right?

I also disagree with this being entirely bullshit, I think he is right that the impact of AI has made the situation worse for him by impacting his most valuable sales funnel (their own documentation pages). But separately, it is a very populated space (UI libraries) with multiple options to compete with, some of which are rather well established and free - so it was an uphill battle to begin with.

"Traffic to our docs is down about 40% from early 2023 despite Tailwind being more popular than ever," he added. He then goes on to explain that "The docs are the only way people find out about our commercial products, and without customers we can't afford to maintain the framework."

People no longer need to look at their docs or their website because they ask AI how to do something with tailwind instead, so they no longer get to expose and advertise their product (tailwind plus).

Tailwind plus is a one time payment, not a subscription. If there are no new customers to buy it, their income is gone.

I worked for a reasonably successful startup in IT, and quit around the time when investors started calling for their returns. It went from the focus being providing good service to selling something, anything, whether we have it or not to boost the books before the end of next quarter. Every quarter. Our sales team who used to be part of the product design process and knew more about our product than some engineers were getting replaced with people who didn't even know the name of features. They just made up things to potential customers and straight up lied, once the paper was signed they were done.

It was demoralising to see and go through this, I was a tech team lead for one of our core products and the requirements were mad. Every customer started becoming their own product because of all the overpromising, and it was all the absolute bare minimum. Anyhow, I was on good terms with the remaining few old sales people as we had worked together a lot prior to this mess.

I remember sitting in a meeting with some higher management and one of these older sales guys where he was saying he does not know what to do anymore and needs help or we need to change something as it's impossible to do his job well anymore with these expectations that we just abandon customers as soon as they're signed and chase new business. He broke down crying during the call while he was explaining how soul crushing it was to have to do this to people - build up a relationship, convince them to pay us and then ignore them immediately. There was an awkward quiet in the room when he finished and the "top dog" in the room just said "try to detach yourself, it's just business" and then we moved on.

I saw myself becoming that man in a year, maybe 2 tops. I started interviewing the next day and found a new job in about 2 weeks (luckily this was when IT was booming and recruiters were lining up for anyone with engineer in their title). The company has since been sold multiple times and completely exhausted to a husk. The last sale I'm pretty sure was just a large enterprise acquiring staff and some tech.

I don't think it is selfish to expect to be compensated for your work - open source or otherwise - especially when you do start doing it for others (e.g. dealing with issues, reviewing prs, fixing and implementing things you wouldn't just for yourself).

If you don't expect it that's great, but as he pointed out - that's charity. No reason to expect that everyone will be in a position to do that indefinitely, especially when it comes to massive projects that turn into full time jobs.

If you're unsure what the vet said, call them back to clarify.

Ask them to tell you what treatment they're recommending exactly and why, what are the alternatives if any and what are the short and long term effects of each, as well as any side effects and risks.

Once you got all that and still unsure or concerned, see another vet and ask for a consultation for a second opinion.

Treat it the same as if your doctor told you that you need operation.

I never pre-order, there is no benefit.

Early access is misleading, there are games which are "released" and would barely count as early access and vice-versa, so I just treat them equally.

The criteria for me is that based on reviews or some gameplay footage it seems like I can get £1/hour worth of enjoyment out of it. I tend to look for how many hours do people have when they leave reviews and how many have they played since, rather than just what they say. If I'm unsure if I'll like it and there is not enough videos or reviews to give me certainty, i may take a risk on £10 and below games depending on how bored I am at the time.

They're doing their part in UK politics. Tories stole everything they could and drove it all into the ground until everyone got sick and elected labour. Now they're raising taxes to put money back in and doing everything they can to make sure they're hated enough that there is no chance they get re-elected. Then, Tories can just walk back in and take all the money coming in from the new taxes again. It's a beautiful cycle of the general population getting fucked from both sides.

It feels like this is treating symptoms, however helpful it may seem in the short term.

Obesity in pets is 100% the fault of the owner, although pet food manufacturers don't make it easy.. I have 2 cats whose breed is well known for being commonly overweight but they're both at their ideal recommended by the vet. It did take effort to find healthier food for them and the correct amount, as well as build up their habits that they get as much as is in their bowl and nothing more regardless of the amount of complaining. It's the same logic as with humans, count the calories going in and adjust that - except pet food manufacturers don't often disclose even an estimate.

Outside cats are a divisive topic already though, in those cases it's arguable whether the owner is solely responsible for it all (due to the decision to let them out) or the other people who also feed the clearly well fed cat a 2nd and 3rd meal because they're trying to befriend it or it "looks hungry".

If we could just have a "don't feed someone else's pet unless you're asked to" mentality + people would research good food for their pets as a standard it'd go a long way imo and it seems safer than putting animals on drugs.

I'm not vegan myself but I had asked a similar enough question to a vegan friend a while ago and liked his answer:

He said for him it's 2 parts, 1 is that while the animal that died may not have been harmed by humans, the ecosystem that relies on scavenging carcasses will be hurt if humans effectively start removing their entire food source (same way we have driven species to extinction by hunting).

The 2nd part is that with humans everything with even the tiniest loop hole will get abused.. Imagine that we say this is okay. Today it may be the odd naturally deceased animal, in a month it'll start including animals "killed accidentally", in a year it'll be someone farming animals with some weird way of culling them so they can claim it's still natural causes by some twisted logic.. at the end of it we'd just not be able to trust any of it anyway so it's easier to not even entertain the thought - the energy to figure it all out would be better spent on improving alternatives.