The picture is a screenshot of a recent viral video where a woman was being street interviewed and she referred to giving a sloppy bj. She said “hawk tuah” as the onomatopoeia for spitting and it became a a meme. In this picture they replaced the “tuah” with “tui” for text user interface. Hawk is a kind of bird. So the meme reads “hawk tui” is the name of their bird based text interface.

I think it is showing what you are saved as in the other persons phone. There are ones where the guy presumably saved a girls number but she didn’t bother to save his and another where the girl saved him as do not answer. I think the point is so you can see how the other person views you. These are mostly joke features and the feature you mentioned is pretty standard now.

I have never had a bad experience with an early access game. I generally only buy early access games from indie studios I am already familiar with, and have never purchased an early access AAA game. I genuinely enjoyed the early access aspect of several games, playing them through different stages in development extends the playtime in my opinion. Every new update feels like free DLC, but the game I purchased felt complete already. In my opinion, early access is far better than kickstarter for games, since at least there is a game you are purchasing and gameplay footage is publicly available, but sometimes these are legitimately the only ways to fund a game.

The issue is that the criticism is generally not valid. If you’re criticizing a colleague for poor time management because they legitimately have poor time management, fine, whatever. It’s not something I would do, but there may be cases in which that is done. In the context of this meme, it is likely not the individuals fault that they are overworked. It is likely a systemic failure that foists too many tasks on each individual worker. Generally, the people “bragging” about working additional hours are not poor performing employees, but people that are dedicated to their job or the company, and believe that the additional hours will help them advance their careers. Approaching it from a place of “if you are a good worker, they should treat you better, not worse” rather than shaming the individual is most likely to help them see the issue with that sentiment. Also, I’m pretty sure it was just a spelling error, but just to be clear I believe this is anti-worker, not anti-work.

Shame is not as effective as offering support, especially since the root cause of the behavior is not necessarily in the persons control. Working additional hours might be seen as a requirement in some fields, so you might be shaming them into not talking about the issue, but the best way to actually solve the problem would likely be to empathize with them and change their perspective.

If someone is in an abusive relationship and they mention the abuse to someone, shaming them for being in that relationship and subjecting themselves to that behavior is unlikely to fix anything. Offering them compassion and support and safe alternatives is demonstrably more effective. Shame is likely to make them more defensive about their choices or stop talking about the abuse they suffer entirely, especially if the issue is not entirely in their control. I think similar behavior and responses would be elicited in the case of working relationships as well. 

Appreciate you adding that last sentence, but ideally no one would work more even for additional pay. People need time to recuperate and enjoy life and in the current system often just getting by requires overtime pay. I’ve worked in both types of positions, and though I’m glad overtime and holiday pay exist in our current system, often the people working more or over the holidays are the most desperate or marginalized.

I think the OP sentiment was directed towards salaried workers because I’ve basically never heard hourly workers talk about it in this way or context. I think the reason salaried employees brag about long hours is largely due to the fact that they might not be getting additional compensation so are at least trying to get social capital in exchange for their time.

“Not normalizing” comes in many forms and this one seems hostile to fellow workers. Approaching it from a place of empathy is far more likely to help than a place of blame. It’s not the workers fault. It’s a systemic problem and the first step to helping someone realize that is to open their eyes to the fact that they are struggling for no reason other than that the institution demands it, not that they are the problem.

The fact that you suggest it’s a cultural issue and then state it can be rectified by organizing is exactly my point. This person is essentially shaming the individual worker for falling prey to a cultural and systemic problem.

I never said we need a socialist revolution. In this context I left system open ended, but you can’t effectively organize anything with people you’re hostile to and unwilling to build solidarity with. I don’t think a socialist revolution is likely or even necessary, but more empathy is. The OP sentiment is not foreplay, it’s outright rejection. It seems like we are actually in agreement.

Is the slave comment supposed to imply that I might be working more than I should? I’m literally saying it’s a bad thing that it happens but we should be sympathetic to people who don’t yet realize that and show them that they are being exploited. I don’t see how this is funny, as there is no punchline or set up or anything. I don’t think everyone needs to agree about comedy but I was sharing my opinion on this sentiment.

What is this anti worker propaganda on .ml? Your fellow worker is brainwashed by the capitalist state and instead of seeking to build solidarity with them you mock them? How about sympathizing with their excessive workload and likely lacking compensation and eventually introducing that a different system would not require that from them?

That’s fair, but it might also just be that they think taking a small loss on providing the watch will boost sales of the phone for people who wouldn’t have gotten it otherwise, will also increase market share, and look better in reporting. If you weren’t going to get a pixel watch, but one came for free and you use it, now you become a watch user for their stats. Additionally, it further entrenches you in the Google ecosystem and familiarizes you with the product so you might end up purchasing the next generation. Also, it helps normalize this product amongst your peers. Completely understandable for Google to possibly take a loss, not that they definitely are. I have no idea what the actual cost versus price looks like.

It seems like we just have a difference of opinions, so I’m happy to agree to disagree, but just so that you don’t think I ghosted, I’ll at least reply.

The word hate in this context was meant more in the sense of “haters”, like unnecessary disparagement for the sake of disparagement, which seems in line with your use of the word ridicule.

I’m not sure what you personally would have preferred, but I do not think that this is particularly vague, given the context and the market. If someone’s parent or grandparent walks into an Apple store and is confronted with the base model, and then a pro, a pro max, and a mini, I feel like they will get an overall sense of how those differ. You’ll likely get people saying, well, I don’t need anything too fancy, I just use it to take calls and maybe look some stuff up, so I probably don’t need a pro, but I definitely don’t want the mini version, so maybe I’ll check out the base model, and if that is still too small, I’ll check out the pro max, even though I might not need the Pro aspect, I might like the Max aspect. Mini and Max makes sense in this context as part of an overall spectrum that a layperson could understand. I guess the argument could be that they could give the screen size specifically, but then it would need a different name depending on local usage of the metric system or not. Also, a lot of people don’t understand that some electronics are measured on the diagonal, so that might also be confusing. S/SE Is probably The worst bit of their naming conventions, and they worked on that.

I think it’s pretty evident that the reason they did not choose pretzel rectangle was because those words are not very information dense, or relevant to the product. I feel like this is kind of proving my point?

Considering the market, I don’t think that most people need the general name of the device to have every single specification included. So long as each iteration is distinct, and understandable, people who actually care about what chip is in it can find the information readily. I don’t think most consumers care about a17 or M2, or bionic, or whatever else, and if anything that kind of technical jargon would be more obfuscating.

I get that this is mostly just a meme at this point, but it’s really not a bad naming system. The switch from plus to max was a little weird but it kept things from being iPhone pro plus. It goes

1. Item
2. Iteration
3. Tech specs
4. size

Which is more informative than a lot of other options. Not a diehard fan or anything, but the hate for this particular issue seems overblown.