Where is this CVS?

Lucky timing is: being a white guy growing up in the 70s/80s America.

Besides that, if you look at the company he started. It started selling books, but he always wanted to sell other stuff. His shareholder letters describe his vision from the very first one and it is consistent. It didn’t change over time. They company got lucky, they talk about prime being a fluke all the time. But on the other hand, the culture in the company was something that supported a fluke like that to bubble up through the idea pond.

Any who, yea. I don’t care for the person that the media portrays him as today. But for his initial years I absolutely give him a lot of credit.

I haven’t heard off Amazon being built on stolen ideas or usurping someone else’s company or being born with a silver spoon.

Yes he was a white male in America in the 70s and has all the privilege associated with that, but there were like another 50 million in that category.

Is bezos an exception?

I was thinking of that. By this guy I’d also the one that is associated with spaceX, Sterling, neuralink and Tesla.

Even if he is only a marketer or a shill or just lucky or whatever; I recognize the fact that not everyone is that lucky or ‘in the right place at the right time’ that often. So there’s got to be something he is doing right.

And that then leads me to wondering, how do you handle that? As a public figure, everything he fits is open to the world, but do you any I always make perfect decisions 100% of the times? And do we really expect anyone to make perfect decisions all the time?

If him and bezos were thinking of always being right, they simply wouldn’t be where they are today. And then you can make the argument that maybe we would have been better off. But what’s to say there wouldn’t have been someone else?

Sorry, didn’t mean to get all philosophical, but I am getting to ignoring billionaires shenanigans than trying to understand the reasoning. Just like I ignore the life of the other 99.9% of the world.

That’s interesting. Guess now you can have farming and solar on the same land?

Didn’t it win an Oscar as well?

Lemmy started getting popular in the last few weeks. Lots of new users, not enough new posts, users being shown old posts which they are commenting in. In turn those posts are making it to the front page of other users.

In the other hand it’s half way through the week.

Your point is incorrect. It is not needlessly complicated. It has to do with mainframe batch processing times.

It’s not a conspiracy, it is a technical challenge that is not easy to some. It is complicated, but not needlessly. If it was easy, it would have been fixed.

I am sure there are a number of private companies that do the same but simply don’t tell you.

E.g., every bank has a cut off time for transfers, same reason.

Massive frame batch processing is the usual reason.

And before it ask why not replace it, the short answer outs it is complicated.

It might be a question better speed in eli5.

Come on. If you actually worked for social security you have to know why. It’s is related to mainframe batch processing.

But I can see why you might say what it did. Maybe you think it seems cooler to simply dump on the government it meant your 20 years of experience is 1 year repeated 290 times. So really 1 year of experience but you just got older.

There is a reason and not what you think.

Look here: https://kbin.social/m/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world/t/162927/-/comment/639904

This is the real answer. Main frame batch processing.

And till you haven’t experienced it, it seems like an excuse. Why can’t you simply do it all the time. Why can’t you get rid of the mainframe, etc.

But if only it were that easy. There is a reason IBM can still acquire multi billion dollar companies and then run them into the ground.

My company has maybe a couple million customers and can’t get rid of its mainframe and in areas that it’s gotten the process away from the mainframe, batch patronizing is still a thing. Because that is the only way to guarantee integrity.

So yea. I wish your comment gets more up votes. Because it is not a conspiracy, it is a technical limitation.

Can you provide any more details about how you did it? Sounds like I need to do this.

Yup. Unless I am clear on what I should be addressing a person as, I simply use the name.

Pretty sure that’s offensive as well. I just use the name speaking about the person with someone else. “Ed asked me to speak with you. Ed mentioned that Ed was not going to join our meeting.”, etc.