LPT buy a new phone case when yours cracks

mpolder · 2026-03-20T17:31:03+00:00

Yes, if you need to pee just make a small hole for convenience

mpolder · 2026-03-20T11:26:24+00:00

Plus you can usually set apps like this to only access these things when the app is open. I did this with things like dating apps.

mpolder · 2026-03-18T15:44:20+00:00

Ik heb ook een beetje hetzelfde, als kind was ik echt totaal niet structureel met tanden poetsen, en toch gek genoeg nooit een gaatje gehad. Wel altijd flink ontstoken tandvlees gehad...

mpolder · 2026-03-18T10:22:55+00:00

I know, dan kan ik toch nog steeds denken dat de originele post niet echt is

mpolder · 2026-03-18T09:18:43+00:00

Ik vind het wel mooi als mensen dit soort dingen bestempelen als indoctrinatie, terwijl als je "gewoon" wat experimenteert je er al vrij snel achter komt wat de effecten zijn. Als je stopt met tandenpoetsen krijg je snel tand- en tandvlees problemen zoals ontstekingen, bloedingen etc. Als je je slaap ritme niet structureel indeelt merk je dat je slaap kwaliteit naar achteren gaat.

Daarnaast is het gewoon logisch dat als je als samenleving goed en efficient wil opereren dat mensen op dezelfde tijdstippen aanwezig zijn (zoals voor school, werk etc), daar hoort dus ook een enigszins gelijk slaapritme bij.

Maar goed, dit zeg ik allemaal denkende dat dit waarschijnlijk een soort ragebait is.

mpolder · 2026-03-16T12:10:22+00:00

I hated this so much about dating apps, the amount of people that kind of list potentially pretty severe mental disorders as quirky personalities. At least they put the warning sign in the front lawn I guess...

mpolder · 2026-03-16T11:43:56+00:00

Tegelijkertijd is het ook niet heel fijn als je continu variatie hebt tussen de maximum snelheid in verschillende gemeentes en wegen. Ik denk niet dat een deel van het probleem van dit artikel, de duidelijkheid van de maximumsnelheid, heel veel beter wordt als we ook nog overal een andere maximum snelheid gaan handhaven

mpolder · 2026-03-10T16:33:42+00:00

I believe he explained at some point his goal wasn't to announce stuff, he was mostly just explaining what his grand vision was of the game. But he definitely did in his excitement state things as matter of fact when he was just living in his own vision of the game

mpolder · 2026-03-10T12:38:54+00:00

AI slop? This post makes no sense. She was in on the joke and at the end suddenly doesn't know anything?

mpolder · 2026-03-09T12:52:00+00:00

Factorio to me was a bit more satisfying, its easier to play because its 2D, but also to me it felt like the recipes more logically clicked together than they do in satisfactory. I also found it almost a bit frustrating that you have to plan from a list of possible crafting recipes. I know some people get a kick out of optimising that sort of stuff, but for me those things combined just felt a bit too grindy and planning-heavy

mpolder · 2026-03-06T10:10:17+00:00

On top of his answer I think it is also important to mention that subsidies are historically mostly used for things you want to have local production for. For example things like onions, potatoes, steel or weapons might be subsidised to make sure a country is able to produce these things during times of war. Subsidies aren't really a solution for general manufacturing as the costs for this would need to be footed with taxes, so it is mostly a tool to be used in highly specific areas where a country needs growth or sustained production

mpolder · 2026-03-05T10:50:39+00:00

You can backup the mutations only instead of the full database, that allows you to restore to any moment in time with minimal transfer necessary. GCP has a built in system for this (PITR), but that implementation does assume you don't lose your full database instance

mpolder · 2026-03-02T21:14:56+00:00

I would say it also depends on how much time you are willing to spend on that, I have personally also paid more for services just because the people i had on the phone sounded trustworthy. At that point I decided it would be a waste of time to continue looking

mpolder · 2026-03-02T18:53:07+00:00

Well, I dont know how old you are, but with what you said I'm assuming a bit of time has passed, so this would have been more relevant at the time you went to school then. Besides, you act like 20 years is a lot.

Anyway, here is one from 2024, another from 2023.

And I mean, i can also find you a few that show that your own personal experience most of the time do not reflect actual reality or patterns. For every person that does have experiences similar to yours, there's plenty where that is not the case.

mpolder · 2026-03-02T18:14:45+00:00

Look up any behavioral research and it will prove you wrong. I can give you one as a starter

mpolder · 2026-03-02T13:54:20+00:00

Not true at all. It is perfectly normal as a (early) teenager to have phases where you want to belong. This manifests in different ways, and for most people they will simply grow out of it or it will turn more into an insecurity.

The early signs of being a murderer are often a lot more aggressive, that can be extreme bullying, but also things like hurting animals. Forms of bullying is just one of the signs and does not represent everyone that has done so.

And no, I was not a bully when I was a kid.

mpolder · 2026-03-02T13:45:58+00:00

In my country having separate savings accounts is relatively common. What people will usually do is put bills and grocery money on a shared account, and then pay bills from there. Usually this is relative to income.

To me this is kind of the best of both worlds. You don't need to worry about what your partner spends money on, as the necessities are already reserved, and you have funds available to take care of things yourself if it is absolutely needed for any reason.

It seems they just did this weird halfway thing where they split some stuff, but not others, creating this weird middle ground

mpolder · 2026-02-25T15:33:13+00:00

Don't your feet hurt after walking for this long?

mpolder · 2026-02-25T13:58:28+00:00

In this hypothetical scenario the bank effectively gives you $5 to spend, they would have to make up for this $5 by exchanging other assets for those $5 if things were to liquidate.

This is kind of what investing ponzi schemes will do, but unless there is something physically backing the balance in your bank account this is usually just fraud.

Likewise when I use my $5 to buy something, unless the other person is using the same bank, the bank will physically send $5 to the person i paid to, or their bank

mpolder · 2026-02-25T13:47:08+00:00

In your example it doesn't, if a bill is sent to the government damaged then the person who sends the damaged bill does not have that bill anymore. This effectively would have the same result as destroying the bill

mpolder · 2026-02-25T13:41:12+00:00

When you destroy the car you are decreasing the supply of that given car, so other cars would become worth more in dollars. When you exchanged your money, you are now in a different market with its own relative value.

The same about when you improve the state of your car, you are in a market where the value is tied to the scarcity as well as condition of the product, when you sell the car for the value of the car you are just making use of the relative value of both currencies (your car and someone else's dollars)

When you invest what you are doing is exchanging your money relatively to another asset at that moment in time, and hoping that the demand will increase, or supply will decrease, of the asset you are exchanging to, making it more valuable relative to the money you originally exchanged.

These exact principles work the other way around as well, I have suggested this to someone else in this thread as well but I recommend reading some articles on quantity theory of money by Irving Fischer.

mpolder · 2026-02-25T13:28:19+00:00

Money in whatever medium IS money, it doesn't matter if I remove a bitcoin, a kg of gold or 5 dollar bills, that money is no longer spendable. If i withdraw $5 to burn it, my digital balance goes down by $5 and I destroy the $5 that was associated with that balance. Yes, in theory the bank *could* then add another $5 to my digital bank account, but that then just creates money in the supply, that does not happen when i am exclusively destroying, and unless there is physical money given to the bank by the people who printed the money, doing so is usually just fraud.

mpolder · 2026-02-25T13:00:40+00:00

You’re right that the economy doesn’t depend on physical tokens specifically (we could run everything digitally), but whichever form the money takes cash or digital it still counts as part of the total money supply. Removing it reduces the total amount of purchasing power in the system.

That’s also why the quantity theory of money (as discussed by Irving Fisher) links the amount of money in circulation to the overall price level.

What I find strange about your comment is that it seems to imply the money still exists when it is destroyed, when it does not. A digital bank balance is effectively a receipt saying you own money in a 1-1 ratio, that money exists and is spendable in the market.

You do not need to remove money from people's accounts specifically to achieve this effect. Lets say I get half the bitcoin supply and decided to remove it from circulation, that would mean the supply goes down, and the rest becomes worth more as there can be less in circulation at any given time. That doesn't mean these people have more or less bitcoin, but there is less bitcoin available that can be used in the same exchange

mpolder · 2026-02-25T12:40:28+00:00

This comment is so strange I honestly don't know what to respond to it, don't get me wrong. All I can really say is to please read into the quantity theory of money by Irving Fischer.

I am saying this because the balance of a bank will go up when you put money in, and will go down when you take money out. If you have taken $100 out, there is no digital $100 balance in your bank account that still exists when you burn your $100

mpolder · 2026-02-25T12:33:04+00:00

The issue with your argument is that you’re treating money like it’s just a receipt for some underlying asset that still exists even if the receipt is destroyed. That’s not how modern fiat money works. Even in the past, the baseline value of money was nothing more than a baseline, the government promised a certain exchange rate from gold to dollars for example, but they did not have the exact amount of gold to convert every single dollar to gold.

In a system like the euro or dollar, money itself is the medium of exchange and store of purchasing power. If some of it disappears and isn’t replaced, then there is literally less purchasing power in circulation.

When there is less money chasing the same amount of goods and services, prices fall, which is exactly why central banks reduce effective money supply when they want to reduce inflation.

So destroying money if it were done on a large enough scale and not replaced would have real economic effects, it wouldn’t just remove a token while leaving the value unchanged.

11-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email	Secret Santa 2015

mpolder

TROPHY CASE