Readit NewsI am always happy to see them.
They work great for me on desktop Chrome with uBlock Origin and Adblock Plus enabled, and they work great for me on ipad and iphone Safari with no adblocking enabled.
About the last idea, I had to look up that name:
> James Riddle Hoffa (born February 14, 1913; disappeared July 30, 1975; presumed dead July 30, 1982) was an American labor union leader who served as the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) from 1957 until 1971.
Do I read it correctly if I understand "Jimmy Hoffas pocket" to be one implementation example of "any disappeared person's pocket"? Or is the specific person, their role, or their era relevant?
There are only a few "famous mysteries" that became such widespread memes in American culture. The ones I can think of are:
1. What happened to Jimmy Hoffa (who killed him?). "The Irishman" on Netflix is a Scorsese adaptation of a "nonfiction" book that documents an old Mafia hitman claiming to have killed Hoffa. (The book is nonfiction, the guy's claims are somewhat contested.)
2. What happened to Amelia Earhart? (Early female aviator who disappeared attempting to fly around the world).
3. What happened to and who was DB Cooper? (A man hijacked an airplane, traded some hostages for a duffle bag of cash at an airport when such a thing was possible, told the pilots to fly to Canada and then jumped out of the plane with a parachute and the duffle bag somewhere over the pacific northwest).
4. Who shot JFK?
Does somebody suffer if you urinate on the grave of a random person who died a hundred years ago? Is it a shitty thing to do?
Society suffers, because people do not wish to be subjected to the sight and smells associated with urination.
A cemetery is usually something of a public park, of sorts. Urinating on a random grave is around the same order of shittiness as urinating on any part of a public park meant to be appreciated or contemplated by people.
If the grave of the random person matters a lot to you, ask yourself, would it matter if the headstone were not there? Would it matter if you did not know there was a grave there?
Every time you urinate on the ground, you are urinating on the remains of millions of people.
With every breath you take, you are inhaling the remains of everyone who has ever been cremated longer ago than it took for their burn gases to homogeneously mix in into the atmosphere (which really does not take very long).
Yes, but when the unfinished work is published, it is well known that it was incomplete.
That said, I can understand the author not wanting it to be published. If is a shitty thing to publish it against the author's will when they are alive, it is equally shitty to do it when they have died.
It's definitely not _equally_ shitty. It's arguable whether it's shitty at all. For an action to be a shitty thing to do, someone must suffer as a result.
I can see a couple of ways to argue that the author's beneficiaries might suffer, and perhaps even that the author themself might suffer depending on your religious beliefs.
But surely it's not anywhere close to _equally_ shitty.
I am firmly on the side of releasing everything. Great works of art are so incredibly valuable (to the culture) that the chance of finding one that might have been missed trumps these other concerns.
GP mentioned that most of Kafka's best works would have been destroyed if his stated wishes were honored (it is debatable whether these were his actual wishes).
A web search turns up that Monet destroyed a lot of his works before he passed.
How many Aeneid's are we 'missing' because the author was successful in destroying their unfinished work?
It's definitely Art, in that it is making a statement, provoking a response, etc. But, it's just a nearly continuous sound, except for the pitch change every few years.
It's a Sound, but it's not Music.
If you were to argue that it is Music, I would ask, "Which part of the piece is your favorite? Why do you prefer it to the other parts?" Trying to answer these questions with a straight face becomes difficult.
If this is Music, then is it possible to make an art installation which has making Sound as its primary focus, and have it not be Music?
Not sure what the OP had in mind, but my current favorite example is Expedia. I have used Expedia consistently for over 15 years. Have bought many flights for the family etc. over the years. They know who I travel with. Yet if I open Expedia now to book a flight, I will have to enter the ages of my kids again, as if Expedia didn't know their birthdays. Apparently it is difficult to get the balance correct.
I'm sure everyone on this site knows that it would not be difficult at all to implement this.
Perhaps there is some valid legal concern over remembering minors' data, but if so, you can pretty easily come up with another dozen examples of sites elsewhere having similar issues with non-sensitive data.
The problem is that you usually have to have someone who is actually passionate about the product to drive all these little things home. Maybe this was a bug that was the next item on their backlog, but then someone in the chain of command said "it's good enough now, ship it.", and then everyone got moved on to the next thing.
Almost everyone at most companies, at all levels, is just doing a job. Very few people actually care about the product.
With this setup:
The feature exists if the company wants to support it in certain areas.
It is not supported in RdJ and other dangerous areas.
Expectations are clearly communicated.
If your preferences generally align with professional critics, you are in the minority as far as I can tell - at least for movies.
I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true for books, vindicating OP, but I don't know of an appropriate data source that could settle this.