To be fair, TVs from the 90s didn't have apps, and I don't actually use the apps on my LG, so it seems fine.
deathbird
joined 2 years ago
When AirBNB first arrived, I think we thought it would be a tool to let people rent a spare room in their house short term to travelers, with a built in system for reviews and reputation building to ensure that it's safe for both parties.
Turns out it's a platform that enables wannabe real estate moguls to buy up housing and convert it into unlicensed hotels for a tidy profit.
My experience with LG/WebOS has been fine if I don't try to get online. It doesn't pester me to do so.
Why yes, cancelling, shunning, etc is bad.
Wasn't that AI generated?
Yeah, give kids easy to use pocket computers to access social media curated by algorithms designed to increase anxiety/engagement and "games" that are single-player gambling simulations, all of which harvests their data just to better learn how to manipulate them, and wonder why kids feel anxious, isolated, or depressed.
This hurts the over-25s too, just to lesser degrees because their brains are fully developed.
Generations are (mostly) made up. So of course they're going to shift around a bit while we all try to figure out what major world event or collective experience defines a particular cohort.
Saying 'female' to refer to a person who is female can sound overly technical or abstracted, and therefore a bit dehumanizing or depersonalizing.
That said, some people over-react, and sometimes it is more appropriate or at least fine to say 'female', for example if you were speaking in the abstract about something that spans between women and girls, or is specifically about biological sex.
But most of the time 'women' or 'girls' or even 'ladies' is going to be more appropriate.
What language are you coming from, out of curiosity?
I would prefer RSS.
I seem to recall it being connected to Vitamin E oil being used as an adjunct.
I miss pidgin so much. I tried to use it the other day with Discord and it was terrible. So God-awful.
Gab is for the fringiest of the right wing. And people often cluster disparate ideas together if they're all considered to be markers of membership within their "tribe".
Leftists, or at least those on the left wing of liberalism, tend to do this as well, particularly on social and cultural issues.
I think part of it is also a matter of not so much what people believe as what they will tolerate. The vaccine skeptic isn't going to tolerate an AI bot that tells him vaccines work, but maybe generally oblivious to the Holocaust and thus really not notice or care if and when an AI bot misleads on it. Meanwhile a Holocaust denier might be indifferent about vaccines, but his Holocaust denialism serves as a key pillar of an overall bigoted worldview that he is unwilling to have challenged by an AI bot.