Outlook is a long list unto itself of random crap that’s probably going to go wrong.

To be fair, it’s not like word or Excel are any less complex, but people tend to know those apps way better for some reason.

The Web version is taking over. Just like they did with teams, they’re starting a webview version of Outlook. They’re very creative this time, calling it “new Outlook” 🤦‍♂️

It’s all very dumb.

I completely agree on the view settings too. It’s like a world unto itself just to sort and organize a single view of Outlook. I helped one user the other day, who simply wanted to see everything as conversations. It’s an easy fix, and it wasn’t the reason they logged a ticket, but it took about 8 seconds and I was already connected to their system.

Do office workers not have a requirement to learn basic MS office skills anymore?

I’m a lot like you. For the most part, I try to look beyond the question being asked, and find the root cause. If the root cause is because of a skill issue, I’ll direct them to the next logical resource. If it’s not a skill issue, or I can’t determine that it’s a skill issue, then I’ll continue to test until I can make that determination.

9 times out of 10, if I find a solution to make a thing work in a program, I’ll share that with them, and let them take it from there.

A lot of the people I support are working in the finance space and my company has an entire support department for finance applications. I’ll either bounce the problem off of them, or just direct them to the finance support team for guidance.

This wasn’t either of those things. It wasn’t even asking how. It was straight up telling me to do a thing for them, in a program they should know how to use. It’s not a complex finance program or anything, it’s literally Outlook.

The short version is that I explained that we have a company policy that we are support, not education.

This is not a support issue because no technical issue is preventing the user from getting this completed.

I work in IT. I usually call my job “IT support” but I’m also technically the system admin, and network admin.

Today, I had someone ask me to delete a calendar for them in Outlook. It wasn’t a shared or special calendar, it was literally just a calendar in their normal outlook.

Bear in mind, they didn’t ask how to do it. They asked me to do it.

That’s a skill issue right there. I’m not in the business of doing other people’s work for them. Now and then I’ll entertain the odd request of “how do I do x” and show someone how to get something done, mainly because it’s a lot less effort than telling them that I didn’t go to university for teaching, and all three ensuing arguments thereafter, because there’s always arguments.

But this was straight up “do my job for me”.

Lol, no, I have my own shit to do.

Even with the years he has as a disadvantage, I would not have bet against Tyson.

It was genuinely surprising that he didn’t win.

To be fair, it went to the judges, and they decided that Tyson didn’t do as well as what’s-his-face… And looking at the numbers, it wasn’t by much.

Say what you will about the man himself, but Tyson knows his sport and he’s damn good at it.

With all that being said, what a crock of shit to waste so much time and effort so that some YouTube wannabe can match up against a retiree. Tyson won more fights than pretty boy has even officially fought, before that dickhead left his daddy’s nutsack. Let me put that another way, there was no time in this guy’s life where Tyson had yet to win a championship. He’s been a world champion for tube boy’s entire life.

As far as I’m concerned, Tyson was in it for the payday. Win or lose, Tyson was walking away on top.

I’m not going to defend people that are too lazy to comprehend words on a sign.

What I will say, is that it took me entirely too long to look up when I was at the grocery store. One of my first jobs was at a grocery store and it took me far too long to notice the signs.

I recently purchased a blade enclosure.

I might be in this meme.

Indeed. I have absolutely no way of knowing anything for certain.

I’m just screaming into the void from this hellscape we call Earth.

Thank you for leaving the explanation in, I’m not versed in what horrors await the US populous with project 2025 for two main reasons:

1. I’m not American
2. I like being happy sometimes

So this fills in a gap for me, and at the same time makes me sad and angry about how many people voted for this garbage.

Either way, I appreciate you. Have a good day.

I’d bet that channel “members” don’t get ads for that channel regardless of premium status.

IMO, Google made premium, almost nobody bought it. So they went after adblockers, hoping that people would get premium to get rid of the ads. People most just Adblock harder.

While this is happening, one exec is peering over the fence at twitch. Where they only way to get away from ads without a pretty good Adblock, is to subscribe to the individual creator.

So they make “memberships” to channels a thing.

Almost nobody buys that either. So they go… What if, even if someone is premium, we give them ads, unless they’re a channel member.

Genius.

Paying to block ads per creator/channel/whatever, is a special level of bullshit that twitch has always had.

The system is working as expected. The companies are trying to find the best way to extract the most value from you using their platform.

I chalk most of the shit that makes teams horrible, is closely related to electron and their whole web app as a desktop app bullshit.

Buckle up, because they’re doing that same enshittification to outlook next. It’s already begun. There’s a “new” Outlook. FML.

I learned all about this in “thinking fast and slow” by Daniel Kahneman. He talks about system 1 and system 2, where system 1 is your kind of knee-jerk reaction to a thing (thinking fast), and system 2 is the contemplative and careful consideration of a thing (thinking slow).

I would argue that some people overly leverage system 1 (thinking fast) because it’s generally easier, and takes less time and mental effort to do. Those that either can’t, or are unwilling to engage system 2 in their day to day activities, will 100% fall for these kinds of misleading prices, since system 1 is cutting so many corners so that it can be fast and efficient (mostly on how much energy is used), that it skips a lot of the cognitive steps and goes right to the (often incorrect) conclusion. That $19.99 is $19 (or $10 in some cases).

In the book, they discuss that system 1 often gives the wrong information that is later rejected by system 2 when further consideration is given to a particular input/stimulus.

If someone isn’t engaging system 2 as a check to ensure system 1 isn’t lying to them, then shit like $19.99 seems cheaper than $20. It doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny, but they’re not targeting thoughtful people with these practices. For thoughtful people, there’s functionally no difference between $19.99 and $20.

Yes, the difference is one cent, but given that one cent is so worthless in today’s society, to the point that Canada stopped making one cent coins (and other countries have done so as well), there’s functionally no difference between the prices.

One cent is only worth anything if it is combined with many other cents. The sum of those pennies becomes valuable when you conglomerate enough of them.

I’ll admit, this works on me sometimes.

I hate that it does, but it do.

The science is about how you initially react to the number. Your brain will see $19, and immediately you’ll think it’s $19. Only upon further inspection and processing through your cognition, you recognise that its $19.99, which is basically $20.

It’s that initial reaction they want, to grab your attention. Anyone who is going through life without leveraging their higher thinking will fall for this shit. Anyone who thinks, at all, won’t.

Unfortunately, there’s a nontrivial number of people who fall into that first category. People who were never taught to think. They just do.

The owners of the legislature don’t want that, so it won’t get done.

The government doesn’t work for you, it works at the behest of those that have long since paid for the “elected” representatives.

Those people own companies that profit from all the misleading prices and adverts. They don’t have any interest in changing that.

I appreciate that you recognise the pitfalls here.

In don’t think you’re wrong at all, and I’m sure as shit not putting in the effort to figure out if you’re right or wrong, but if someone comes along with better/newer info, you have already recognized that the info you have might be outdated.

Kudos.

Living in Canada, this shit never worked for me.

Our laws require that pretty much everything is taxed, some more than others, but taxed nonetheless. Despite this, our laws also allow for the tax to be excluded from the price listed for an item, so tax has always been an unpleasant surprise during checkout for me.

I’m sure many other Canadians can echo my sentiment.

The fact is, I’m always expecting to pay between 10 and 15% more on pretty much everything when I get to the checkout, so I tend to do math in my head to figure it out. Let’s just say that when I see $4.99, it’s easier for my brain to figure out 10 (or 13%, or 15%) of $5 than it is to figure out the tax on $4.99, so I err higher rather than lower on everything.

I see $4.99, I think $5 +tax and I figure that will set me back somewhere between $5.50 and $6 at checkout. Doing the math, the current HST tax in Ontario where I am, IIRC is 13%. 13% of $4.99 is $0.6487 (the company will round up to the nearest penny, so 65 cents), which is $5.64. going from $5 at 15% (which is what I’ll do in my head for simplicity), I’d estimate it’s $5.75 at checkout, and get pleasantly surprised when I save 11 cents because the tax was less than I anticipated.

All of this shit is kind of moot IMO, since I think people aren’t looking at prices nearly as much as they used to. When I was young, debit cards didn’t exist, credit cards were a tedious process of filing out paperwork, and so most of the time people carried cash. It was common for people to add up their costs as they went to ensure that the cash they brought would cover the items they’re buying at the grocery. For smaller transactions like convenience stores, you’d just do it in your head, and for big ticket purchases, like appliances, furniture, vehicles, etc, you’d use cheques or credit cards because the hassle of doing that was outweighed by the liability of carrying thousands of dollars to the store to buy a thing.

With debit/interac/whatever, and the chip/sign, or chip/pin process (and/or “tap” to pay), you have convenient, and instant access to your entire life savings on a whim with near zero effort or inconvenience. It’s never been so easy to spend money (especially money you don’t have - eg overdraft or credit cards).

When I started to do my own grocery shopping, sometime after debit/interac/chip&pin was made to be commonplace, I rarely looked at prices. I assumed the price was reasonable for what I was buying, and concerning myself with the nickels and dimes of it all was more effort than I cared to put into buying something I wanted or needed.

With the prices of everything going haywire in the last 5 years or so, I find myself looking at prices a lot more and going for alternatives to my “usual” brands of products simply due to price alone, especially when grocery shopping. If I can kick my grocery bill from $300 to $250 by simply buying smarter, that’s a cheap date I get to go on with my spouse that I otherwise couldn’t afford. That’s more valuable to me than buying name brand cereal or cans of Campbell’s soup over the store brand.

IMO, I’m the problem… or rather, my previous mentality was the problem that in part led to the crazy increase in pricing. I didn’t concern myself if something was a cheaper option and just bought whatever I wanted or whatever I was used to buying. I don’t have brand loyalty beyond “this was good/worked in the past, so I’ll buy it again”. That amount of “loyalty” doesn’t extend to significant increases in the price of things. The prices went up and while my grocery bill went up, I didn’t pay much attention to it. That’s just what it cost me. The cost always changed because I wouldn’t always buy the same things, nor the same quantity of things. So I expected it to be fairly random. That created a false loyalty to products that just kept going up in price. I kept paying that because I wasn’t paying attention. So they kept going up because the company didn’t see a drop in sales because of the increase in price.

Now, I’m much more conscious of what I’m buying. I’ll compare not only the cost, but the quantity of a thing. If I can get 700g of something at $5 but an alternative has 1000g for $6. I’ll get the $6 item, since I’m paying more, for a lot more, therefore I’m paying less per gram. I’ve become the kind of shopper that most companies can’t keep. If prices go up, I’ll jump to another brand that’s cheaper. If the quantity goes down (shrinkflation) I’ll go to a brand that gives me better value for my dollar.

I’m one step away from cutting coupons here. I’ll do it too.

At the end of the day, it’s all about economics for me. If it’s going to take me more time to compare, or find coupons, or whatever than I’m saving by doing that, then I won’t do it. Right now, cutting coupons falls below that value line. I put my time ahead of the proposed savings by cutting coupons. My time saved by not doing it, is simply more valuable to me right now. If/when that changes, I’ll start doing it.

Fuck corporations.

She’s having a glass of wine, not getting shit faced. What the fuck is this tweet?

I’m in a place with daylight saving time, and when DST ends, the sun is basically only out when I’m working, so I don’t really ever see it, nor do I get to enjoy any time in the sun.

Once that happens, the happy chemicals get much harder to brain.

“I’M A VAMPIRE! I’M A VAMPIRE!”

truly remarkable cinematic masterpieces that he’s created over the years.