That wouldn’t be required for the person’s statement to be true.
That wouldn’t be required for the person’s statement to be true.
I combat this habit by placing a window over the top of whatever app I’m using for the video call so my eyes stay on the camera. That strategy is foiled the moment screen sharing becomes required, but more often than not I know exactly what they’re talking about. As I’ve never been on the receiving end of this strategy who knows if it makes me look better or like a weirdo…
It’s more Futurama!
This has been my experience too. A random party w/ friends that rages until the next morning after 2 months of silence? Sorry, didn’t mean to be that loud. We’ll keep it down next time, let you know in advance, & even extend an invite. An every 3rd day blasting of music at whatever hour? Fuck you, I pay rent, I don’t care if it bothers you.
Ah yes, the 'I singlehandedly thought it was the expected result" explanation. If true, still not helpful.
At that level buyers & sellers are likely drug agnostic. They buy whatever sells & sell whatever is being bought. Profit margins are likely what’s driving the transition. However, & somewhat to your point, why not both?
Not only is this showerthoughts, as you pointed out, but the person posting never provided numbers for those that were previously aware of crowdstrike. Any attempt to do so by those responding takes the statement beyond it’s intention.