My point is, they gave enough lip service, half gestures etc... to try and convince the "don't murder everyone in Gaza" some hope that they could be worked with. IE, they delayed one shipment, Harris didn't meet with Netanyahu that one time.
Again fully agreed they were ineffective half measures, but that was enough to let the Pro-Isreal lobby go in super deep "OH MY GOD LOOK HOW ANTI-SEMETIC THEY ARE!!! I NEVER".
Lets be real, while I love the idea of users making informed choices.... how big do you think the labels on cigarettes to say "they will give you cancer and kill you". People aren't bright, you can warn them until the cows come home, they want to play a game, they will buy it. Very few of them would have listened to any warning no matter how blatent.
People are stupid... for 99.9% of people "we'll send out the code and let you set up private servers", is really no different than we'll shut down the servers and you can never play again. There's not a huge overlap between people who understand how to create a private server and/or set up their routers to allow incoming connections, and people who actually can convince friends to join their servers.
Now maybe the "the servers are guaranteed to remain until X date", is a reasonable one. Very least tells people their games have a shelf life and not to buy it after a certain point in time.
IMO I think the common thread of democrats policies... is they keep thinking if they put one foot in both camps, that they will get both camps.
So, on Gaza... they took the stance of. "let the genocide continue, send the weapons, but also send sternly worded letters".
Result: The stand with isreal crowd hears "The democrats don't support isreal". The stop the genocide people, hear they are still supporting the genocide. Result, everyone hates their stance.
Hence why musks superpac sent 2 ads, one to jewish areas pretending to be the harris campaign saying "I stand with palestine", and an ad to the muslim populated areas saying "I stand with isreal".
Same on the border, instead of announcing how BS the "Migrant crime" claims are, or how bad for everyone mass deportation is, she just said "I tried to give you everything on the border, you stopped me".
Phones is absolutely a valid point these days, IMO OS > web + web browser in terms of what you can get.
MS and google both know what porn you are looking at. What you buy from your PC etc... MS knows how much time you are spending playing games + has screenshots of all your encrypted conversations etc...
Honestly I disagree... From what I've heard from app developers etc... ads generate far less money than even $1 app sales. Now maybe that's the brokers etc... But there's also a reason why Hulu shut down their purely ad supported tier, and none of the big companies are leaning into that. Only "subscribe and get ads" lower dollar tiers.
I'm no super expert, but I think ads are still very inefficiant ways to make money... the profit per customer is very small even with the most privacy invasive blast you away with everything aspect. I don't claim to be an expert, but it appears to me an ad supported service needs around 100x more users to make the same money as a low cost service. However, in actual userbases it goes closer to 1000x when that offer is on the table.
because then things would just shut down... The poor suckers that don't use adblockers are what pay the bandwidth and hosting costs for those of us that do. If it becomes the default, things would either shutdown or go paywall.
I mean the concept is pretty simple, all they have to do is make whatever the content it is not play without the verification.
Now I do have to say, it does come down to what is the system we do want? We can agree we don't want intrusive ads. We can say that the paid for services are too expensive. But at the end of the day when we refuse to pay for the content, and then bypass the ads, we do leave content creation in a rough spot. We've kind of reached a point where we need a new system. Yet all we seem to do is try and find ways to break the existing one.
I mean I guess a food bank would have food already as well... They are both one time use consumable supplies so, whether they have them or not, they are going to have to resupply at some point.
Honestly I think the biggest issue in law enforcement in general... is human testimony has this kind of weight to begin with. This guy was convicted of murder... with apparently the entirety of the evidence against him being "a criminal said he did it".
Even if the penalty was JUST 20 years in prison, and death penalty wasn't on the table, that's so wrong to me. 1 man's word is not a reliable way to confirm anything. People have garbage memories, and can lie.
Agreed we can't tell which way the flip is... and that's kind of the crux of the issue... The evidence was unverifiable from day 1. So even if the death penalty was never on the table... this man had nearly 30 years of his life taken away... on literally one persons word, to top it off that one person was confirmed to be a criminal.
So yeah there's 2 major giant red flags to our justice system in this case. 1. The terribleness of death penalty to begin with. But 2. the idea of a single eye witnesses word having the ability to take decades of someone's life away,
Umm... is this post edited or something. I'm seeing
Donating canned goods to food pantries is like donating needles and syringes to a cancer research organization
I don't see the word "used" in it. So, it sounds like he's saying donating medical supplies to an organization that does medical research?
To which I'd say yes both seem helpful to an organization that helps people in need.
I do agree on the whole, It's the next phase of automation. The real problem stems from the fact that we hold onto the system where a tiny handful of people get the full benefit of the productivity, while the others are paid in time incriments which value goes down with demand, so as more jobs are automated or assisted (to allow more work with less people), supply demand devalues the labor.
Tech so loves to repeat the same loops, and IMO I think it's on us the fediverse for really failing to communicate the value of instances as well as making them easy.
(Number of people that have told me they think mastadon sounds like a good idea, but they don't know how to pick the right instance). I try and smack them and say "it's just like e-mail, you and your friends don't have to choose gmail, your friend can be on yahoo, and you still talk to eachother. Whcih makes sense when explained, but it seems like few hear that kind of comparison.
So... we have a new platform, to replace twitter... yay!... should we take counts on how long before either enshittification begins, flooding of ads or changes to be unusable), or it sells out to another already established billionare that abuses the power of media control etc...