Hazzard

Eh, this is a thing, large companies often have internal rules and maximums about how much they can pay any given job title. For example, on our team, everyone we hire is given the role "senior full stack developer", not because they're particularly senior, in some cases we're literally hiring out of college, but because it allows us to pay them better with internal company politics.

Ah, he recommends saving 1000$, then tackling your debt, then building to 3-6 months expenses. Which is... fine, I agree with the principle of it, but that number is definitely one of those things I'd consider being more flexible with. The amount I think you should save before tackling your debts depends on a lot of factors.

I also don't necessarily agree with saving that amount in two blocks, we personally saved 1000$, paid the most pressing card off, and then saved another 1000$. I think it makes sense to adjust that minimum emergency fund number as your situation evolves.

Just another case where I find he works fine as a starting point, but where most people shouldn't follow his advice to the letter.

Mmm, excellent addendum to my proposed changes. 1000$ is better than nothing, but it hasn't really kept up with inflation, and circumstances really change things. For example, if you have a house, the potential opportunity and cost of an "emergency" goes up immensely.

But yeah, for us personally we pretty quickly went up to a 2000$ emergency fund, despite the relative stability of renting and driving a fairly new car. We'll be working on our 3-6 month expense emergency fund soon. I definitely think it's better to view the baby steps as flexible guidance on a starting point, rather than the concrete law they frame it as.

I think I have an interesting perspective here, as someone who did kinda get their finances under control thanks to a Dave Ramsey course, and later had the unpleasant experience of discovering how much of a right-wing idiot he is during COVID.

Something I've noticed is that a lot of his advice seems targeted towards people who are crushingly bad at navigating debt. One of the most viral things they do is called "the debt free scream", where people share their stories on his radio show after getting debt free, and just... do a victory scream, essentially. Kinda fun, not really a bad thing, but it shows how most of the people he deals with directly and the ones that make the best marketing are people with hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars of debt despite making very average money. Just absolutely no self-preservation instinct around available credit.

And for these people I think his advice makes sense. Absolutely no debt, debt is the enemy, it will crush you. And stuff like how he pushes you to chase paying debt with high intensity, get multiple jobs, etc. Because otherwise it's impossible to even manage to put money on the principle of a debt that large.

For the average person though? His best advice is basic budgeting, focusing on paying your debts one by one so you can celebrate each victory quickly, and building an emergency fund so you don't need to go backwards as soon as you have a car problem. Also, yeah, ditch the brand new truck, it's burying you in debt you didn't need.

But absolutely, I'd highly recommend modifying his recommendations for most people, and I don't doubt someone out there is doing a better job of teaching this stuff than Ramsey is. My advised tweaks:

• Find a budget you can live with, paying your debts a couple months faster isn't worth being miserable, and makes it more likely you'll be able to stick to a budget for as long as it takes.
• Zero-based budgeting (budgeting every dollar at the start of the month) isn't really necessary, leaving a little loose change that you can allocate later once the month is actually happening is pretty helpful. It's ok to shift things around so long as you aren't spending money you don't have.
• Actually do keep "fun money" or "restaurant money", so long as you're capable of including it in the budget without hamstringing your ability to pay debt. If you're giving more to debt than these things, then you're probably fine.
• Ultimately just... think for yourself, and make your own decisions, based on your own income and expenses. Ramsey is a decent, if aggressive, starting point (and again, not the best person, he seems to have lost the plot somewhere).

I don't know if I give it a 0% chance yet. He needed to average 8 points per race, and Red Bull has been all over the map lately.

But yes, this shifts the onus over to Red Bull having to screw up, moreso than Lando being able to do it while they maintain performance. Lando could potentially earn up to 25 points if Max has a single DNF, which would erase this weekend entirely. And we don't know that he won't crawl his way up to 5th or something tomorrow either, nor does this necessarily mean Max will dominate tomorrow.

Still lots on the line though, if Max does place particularly well and Lando can't get into the points, a 20+ points swing in his favour would lock down the WDC pretty well. An interesting race to watch for sure, the end of this season has a much more competitive WDC than last season's.

Makes sense. I wouldn't think the average person taking on the exceptional training of Olympians would be good for you, but of those with the natural health and talent to try, Olympians are the ones who got that far without injuring themselves, and will therefore likely continue with some safe training with proper technique, and maintaining good health into old age. I'd imagine that benefit outweighs the damage extreme sports and training does to your body.

I'd assume that measuring generally fit people who exercise regularly and eat well, without pursuing the extremism of world class athleticism, would live even longer on average.

Huh, I'm using a VPN, so not terribly concerned, but that is my current IP.

Unsurprised. I was involved in some great discussion on SBMM on Lemmy recently, and people's issues with it, but this confirms what I suspected. SBMM is better for companies, maximizing player on-boarding and player retention, which is what's necessary to get more players and revenue. Even if I honestly think it's a worse experience than the old school way, and keeps me from personally enjoying these games.

I'm inclined to agree! That's awesome, adding that to my following immediately.

Ooh, this is very interesting. I'm a sucker for emulator progress reports, just a fascinating intersection of programming, graphics, and gaming. My personal RSS feeds right now (which I'd love to add lemmy discussion to) are:

https://dolphin-emu.org/blog/feeds/ https://pcsx2.net/blog/rss.xml https://www.libretro.com/index.php/feed/ https://blog.ryujinx.org/rss/ https://xenia.jp/feed.xml

Yeah, agreed, a good DLC is awesome. The example that comes to mind for me is From Soft. Top notch content, delivered well after the release of top notch games, at a fair price, which expand on the level and boss design and improve it every time, while stepping up the difficulty for those who loved and fully completed the base content.

I wish every game I ever loved would get DLC like that.

Yeah, personally I've always enjoyed playing IRL with people who are better than me. Having a real person gives me that constant measuring stick I'm looking for, and playing with someone better gives me someone to watch and learn from, which helps me improve way more quickly. But that's... not what gets you the big sales numbers and a smooth player onboarding.

For PvP stuff, the experience I enjoyed the most was playing Smash with dorm mates in college. Getting my ass handed to me in 1v1 matches for months by the guy who owned the console, but learning, grinding, letting that guy I wanted to beat motivate me to use the training room, to watch YouTube videos, study techniques, and try to really master my character, learning how to be unpredictable and perform mix ups that needed to fool an experienced player who knew my weaknesses better than anyone, it was so satisfying. And by the end of the year we were on even footing, and I was maybe even a little better, which just felt incredible and so well earned.

That experience is what ranked PvP just completely lacks. Every time you win they just swap in new players who are that little step better than you until you're perfectly even again. Which is great on a game-to-game scale, each battle is hard fought, but just offers nothing on that wider timescale that I need to really care.