Skip Navigation

Posts
0
Comments
2297
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Revenue is not profit, and even then its not about whether they have the raw cash. Monthly, and quarterly, and or even yearly payment raw cash flow isn't how any healthy business operates.

    They still have to maintain the existing network, continually upgrade that network, plan and test for future upgrades costing tens of billions in additional capital expenditures, and pay for all of the network support, customer support, and marketing, and and sales teams behind it all.

    All of that has to be funded via those profits across years of infrastructure planning. If they don't have the money when a new generation of technology comes on the market, then they don't have a way to upgrade their network.

    Covering an additional 25% increase in cost for your overpriced Apple TV subscription is a very low fucking priority.

    No one is leaving T-Mobile because Apple is raising the price and T-Mobile isn't covering it. They're leaving because they're already considering it and this is a final straw. Despite that also meaning they'll be paying Apple $12.99 for it instead of $3 through T-Mobile. But I guess paying $13 more for it instead of $3 must somehow make sense for some people.

  • If you mean by Apple, then yes. The Apple TV add-on pricing is increasing by $3 on both the currently free add-on, and the separate purchase. You want them to just eat that $3/month additional per customer?

    What am I saying, of course you do. It's obvious based on your original response. You have been getting this perk for nearly 5 years already. You still get the same perk, T-Mobile paying for the plan up to a specific amount. Apple has increased their price and T-Mobile isn't going to cover that increase for you.

  • This wasn't a couple months free trial. This was something offered for 5 years, and now the economics have changed. It's not at all what you're trying to imply.

  • Yeah the company that actually creates a market rarely maintains being the market leader once it matures. They always have too much debt from creating the market to be able to capitalize on it most effectively.

  • Of course they are, because that's what Russia wants. They're posting an article from a Russian state-controlled media outlet. The US administration, and the currently run by a friend of Putin for over 40 years, proposing a Russian solution isn't very surprising.

  • The entire thing is adb am active investigation so we'll get this, except for democrat names, and just enough context to imply guilt, even if they're just being indirectly referenced.

  • Isn't California's map dependent on the Texas one going into effect? That was the original wording at least back when it was first introduced.

  • Of course. They're massively profitable.

    1. You can ignore half the emissions standards requirements
    2. People want them because they're scared of driving a smaller vehicle while the other massive trucks on the road can crush them.
    3. They always talk about the ability to move things like furniture or equipment or things like thag despite only doing that twice a year, and rentals existing, including directly from places like Lowe's and Home Depot.
    4. People are willing to pay a premium because they mistakenly think that bigger vehicles cost substantially more to make because bigger must mean a lot more material, despite most of a vehicle being empty space.
  • The Christians have been hypocrites for hundreds of years. It's a cornerstone of their faith at this point.

  • So someone was smart enough to set the preference on as a default.

  • Yeah, but that's almost entirely because they've shifted hardware priorities to AI and inflated their pricing to capitalize on the corporate grift, over everything else because of the bubble and limited competition. Losing that means little actually changes, they just shift hardware sales back to other customers instead of telling everyone elss to go fuck themselves while they send everything to AI companies.

  • He's not. Nvidia is the only company actually making money from this. The bubble bursting doesn't really hurt them at all. Their company isn't based solely on AI, and they have plenty of other baskets to shift their eggs into.

  • Cue the inevitable MAGA death threats to that judge.

  • Why are all these articles lying. It's still not following the em dash rules, you just now have a preference setting to have it not use the em dash.

    It doesn't understand how to use it any better than before.

  • Misinformation is bad regardless.

    That being said, jokes are jokes. The issue is that the brain dead that can't actually tell reality from clear fiction seem to also be the ones running the country.

  • The program doesn't need to end, it needs to have severe restrictions on use.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Well you're in luck, that should be coming soon.

  • Microsoft just needs to start kicking shit out of the Kernel. Allowing any of it is inherently insecure on a fundamental level.

  • I'd bet 99% of those deceased individuals are receiving benefits to an account that hasn't been accessed since they died. Meaning the government just never processed the death notification to stop the benefits.

    So not actually fraud, just beureaucratic incompetence inherent to these overly complex systems that would be solved by things like UBI or other real social safety nets instead of having a million qualifiers for access.

  • For those that don't know, even if the annual vaccination doesn't target the dominant specific strain that year, it still provides more protection than no vaccine!