I pay for a vpn service and whenever I'm on it google makes me go through a ton of captchas before I can search. The first time it happened I assumed I must've kept getting one wrong, it made me go through 10 or so. The next time I just quit after 5 and started using bing.
I suppose it's been the policy of a lot of big tech companies for a while, but it's just cheaper for them to lose x percent of users than it is to allow y percent of bots.
Some of them just detect your IP and dump you in an endless loop. Sort of like a captcha shadow ban. I suppose they might let you through after 30 loops or something, but only a bot would last that long.
I can't remember the name of the book I read this from so grain of salt/do your own research, but it was on the topic of why farming replaced hunting/gathering/migratory patterns.
One of the reasons mentioned was because despite hunting/gathering generally providing better nutrition (due to the variability in food), farming produced more calories. So the decision became (these number are made up) "we can farm and provide high quantities of poor nutrition to keep all of us alive", vs "we can hunt/gather to keep 75% of in great health, while 25% of the group dies."
Basically once a certain population threshold is reached the group has to enter a cycle of farming -> allows more babies to survive -> farm more. Your comment and this anecdote reminds of the capitalism cycle of consume more -> produce more value -> consume more.
If true, we've been unable to escape this cycle for thousands of years.
> we've been unable to escape this cycle for thousands of years
Modern agriculture produces varied, nutritious and plentiful foodstuffs. It also produces nonsense filler. But it’s simply not correct to claim that we’re stuck in the tradeoff our ancestors made when they settled down to farm.
>But it’s simply not correct to claim that we’re stuck in the tradeoff our ancestors made when they settled down to farm.
I mean we are because if we go back to hunting/gathering billions of people would die.
The point is that that at the time, farming produced worse nutrition, but despite that we couldn't go back once we started. There's a whole lot of other variables today that obviously prevent us from going back to hunting/gathering.
> if we go back to hunting/gathering billions of people would die
And those who survive wouldn’t be much healthier. This isn’t a tradeoff. It’s a net gain. The original tradeoff was a worse but more-stable food supply. Today we can reliably produce nutritious food. No tradeoff.
>I get to a point where someone might tell me to remember 3 things at the grocery store and I’ll remember only one.
Too real. If someone gives me two or more items to get I tell them I'm not going without a list. If it's the end of a day, whatever I'm trying to remember just gets pushed out after fifteen minutes.
At the moment the number of open jobs is not huge. The majority of companies that haven't had lay offs have simply closed their open positions. Combined with a ton of layed off developers, most job postings get hundred of applicants within a few hours.
At the moment the number of open jobs is not huge.
As someone else mentioned here, Walmart apparently has over 1000 software related openings right now. I know a few companies outside the traditional 'Silicon Valley' company ecosystem trying to hire developers and I can promise you they're not getting 100s of applications within a few hours. The jobs are definitely out there, they're just not where most people are looking and perhaps not in a field, company or geographic location that are most people's first choice.
Yes, the ceiling of the guarantee. If the bank has additional assets to be sold you can still receive more of your deposit back, but the government doesn't guarantee it.
I suppose it's been the policy of a lot of big tech companies for a while, but it's just cheaper for them to lose x percent of users than it is to allow y percent of bots.