Wear whatever the hell you want, right? Screw genders and made up rules around them.
Wear whatever the hell you want, right? Screw genders and made up rules around them.
And that is actually illegal in the EU
It didn't take a lot for me. I clicked on the link, took a look at the first post and there you go! Advocating for terrorism and defending genocide, and every comment is full of hate, using mostly language that is particular to dark corners of the internet where incels and fascists thrive.
The comments weren't responses to comments they didn't agree with so it's not like they got provoked or anything. The hate is inherent. Imagine what it looks like when someone tries to contradict them.
For me, I'd like to be as far away from such resources as possible. They give too many negative vibes, and I'd rather spend my time and energy in places that have a possibility of a constructive discourse.
So you're openly hating on people for being normal, without offering a single alternative of a video platform that's not all of those things that you labeled as evil.
There are alternatives, they've been posted many times over in this thread and similar ones.
The alternative to shopping isn't shoplifting. The usual things that people list are client side apps that circumvent intended operation of the platform, reaping as many benefits without paying the cost. But hosting isn't free. Running a business isn't free. And hating the people who literally subsidize your unauthorized use of the platform is hypocrisy.
So if I abhor violence and people getting hurt, suddenly I'm a "capitalist shill".
Speaks volumes of your intellect, I must say
Me too. And I'd rather not look it up, to not give them more measured attention. I'd rather ask people who experienced it :D
Well it's good that you care. It's the multitude of opinions and open discussion, what makes a democracy work.
Unfortunately we have siloes of opinions, so you're pretty much either trying to yell in an echo chamber or at best, argue with a moderate like me. The moment you're faced with the people leaning right, some of the rhetoric might be scary for them, and they might retract further into their own silo, where more and more extremist views are tolerated.
The key to a functioning society, is moderation in enforcement of law (so that the state continues to be the only one who is able to, and expected to exert force), and understanding of each other so that it remains an open dialog.
I'm originally from a country where society has degraded into 2 irreconcilable camps, and it got to the point where I can't even stand my own parents because their echo chambers had lead them to extreme extremes. And I'm not the only one.
Right now what is paramount is a government that optimizes social well-being (think Finland), and the enforcement of those laws, because everyone from Putin (and the general club of autocrats) to fundamentalist fascists everywhere else, want to destabilize that right now. A prosperous democracy is a threat to all of them. Whether you like it or not, we are in the middle of an ideological war.
Yes. But. Not sexual nudity. Nudity is fine in itself, but the fact that most people see it as sexually explicit, sexually suggestive, or an actual sexual activity, is the problem. Consciously I am for this, but subconsciously I'd still react to nudity as sexual (as most other people), because I've not yet encountered enough non-sexual nudity to get used to it. It's like going to a beach - at first it's "niiice sexy bodies", but on the second day it's like "meh, people making it hard to get to the water". It's the novelty.
Xbrowsersync extension will make it easy to sync bookmarks across multiple browsers on multiple platforms. It's open source and you can self host it if you want. This for me makes it easy to combine Firefox with brave and similar. Only Vivaldi doesn't support it.
Hope this makes your browser switching easier and cross platform choices simpler.
Because it costs nothing to run data centers, employ thousands of people, distribute exabytes of data.
Shipping labels, concert tickets, sometimes train tickets and airline tickets (some companies don't accept them just on the phone), contracts, NDAs, tax returns, etc.
Depends on where you live and how much you interact with other companies and government agencies.
I explicitly said that I'm all for justice. You are being dishonest with your last statement, which is an emotional reaction that is completely unnecessary. Cool down.
So if your sources are correct, then when comparing the organization that should have the monopoly on violence, to how much violence they enact, it's 15%,... it's kinda dumb, isn't it? It's dumb to expect the organization with the monopoly on violence to enact an order of magnitude less violence than the "competitors".
We have far more complex systems than 15 years ago. Complexity has skyrocketed because of human failures in designing optimal, elegant systems, but also because of premature optimisation, convenience, and security.
To top it all off, literacy in computers hasn't necessarily increased for the median user.
But if 15 years ago computers had to be regularly restarted, Windows had notoriously frequent Blue Screen of Death, Linux was not really feasible as a desktop system for most people, today we're doing much better.
No. They don't grant police that power. The judicial system has that power. Just like it has the power to imprison people.
We all know that Youtube need to get rid off of AdBlockers because they want to make more money than what they are making now.
Making money by charging for completely optional services is not only not wrong, but the very reason why we have most of the good stuff that we have.
If they just need to cover business costs they could just make the service subscription only, make the fee high enough to keep the site running and earn something and allow to see only the first 10-15% of each video to not subscribed users and forget all this charade about AdBlockers.
Awesome! Submit your resume or send it as a proposal. If they didn't think of this first and discarded it because of reasons that you haven't considered, this might be an opportunity to benefit everyone.
Stock prices are one element of what makes business possible. Youtube would not even exist without this mechanic.
It's like complaining that people have sex.
It's a core facet of running a business. It's a requirement and an expectation. This is part of "keeping the lights on".
If you think so, you should explain where exactly the 1.624 trillions $ value of Google is, given that its net assets are about 267 billions $ and they had about 118 billions $ in cash (or cash equivalent)
You can sell a cow for $1000 on the meat market. Or you can keep that cow, so that it produces milk for many years and earns you a total of $5000. This is the difference between net asset value and valuation. If you were to buy a cow, and producing a cow was next to impossible (cows are one of a kind, like unicorns), then the price of the cow would be closer to the valuation than its net asset value. And once you have that cow, as a responsible farmer you will milk it to the last drop, to get the most out of your money.
Now I'm sorry for the cow, but a business isn't a living creature so exploiting it is ok.
The company isn't necessarily expected to grow. Companies are expected to be milked. Sometimes companies don't grow and that's ok, they're still being milked. The only requirement is that the owners of the cow, at any age of the cow, will believe that there's milk in there somewhere some day.
It's not a loan, it's actual ownership. And the expectation is that people get something out of it.
YouTube would exist almost as a hobbyist site that has issues scaling its users and monetizing its activity. At some point it would have failed because people would find it frustrating to face the lags, and the owners (who by the way are still owners, who still invested in it, so actually very little changes in this mechanic) would introduce subscription fees or something in order to use the platform. Would it have become a ubiquitous platform as it exists today? Would you have it on your tablet, tv, phone? Probably not, but any of its competitors would have gone on a very similar journey and you'd be complaining about a different company, because you need investments in order to grow, become better, more attractive, and become both the way that people choose to upload content, and the way that people choose to consume content. And it would have been YouTube who couldn't have afforded to keep the lights on at this moment.
A loan without the need to repay it.
I'm sorry, but that statement is as false as "developers get paid to much simply to press buttons. Anyone can do that".
At the heart of this statement sits a conviction that you understand the topic, while you are missing some fundamental facts about it.
Why don't you play a few thought experiments? Put yourself in other people's shoes. If you were someone who had money, why would you put it in a loan that doesn't have a need to be repaid? If you're suggesting that the entire stock market rests on the "greater fool" principle, then maybe you don't know about the end goal? Did you consider the "return on investment"? This literally is the very thing that powers the farmer who buys a baby cow, and what makes trillion dollar companies. Literally, the same instruments and calculations that financiers and CEOs of huge companies use day to day, my acquaintances who literally run their own pig farm, use every year - from options on feed, to futures on meat before even buying the piglets. The only thing they don't do of this equation is stocks, since it's a small farm and it's owned fully by the family, and they don't need to scale.
Convenience and performance.
I'm a dual user of Firefox and Brave on different computers. In order to separate work and personal stuff and shopping, I use different profiles. Easy on brave, needs extension with separate app on Firefox, that doesn't work on librewolf. And too often I have to stop my browsing because this Firefox setup is less stable and crashes once in a while causing annoyance.
Plus Chromecast. I like the ability to search for a video on the laptop and cast it to the TV.
It's always a balance of convenience and privacy plus ethics, can't have both.
Then your problem is the judicial system, isn't it?
When other people murder far more people, is the police just supposed to watch it happen?
Is there an end to your naive idealism?
There were no protests. No lawsuits, no nothing. Straight to violence.
And people here actually believe that it's good to hurt other people, as if that fixes the death of one person. Horrible in every way. Shameful and disgusting.
And you derive this conclusion on .. what study or poll? Because there are instruments to measure that you know. It's called voting.
Or are you referring to a violent loud minority and saying that it's a majority?
Do you have any idea how many people are killed by the police when they are unarmed?
Fewer than armed people killing other people when the police isn't there. If that ain't true then obviously the police should be disbanded. And since you haven't brought up any data, I will bring it, from the latest news. 15 incidents like that, in France, in the last year. And according to data I found for 2016, there were around 1500 total gun deaths (about 100 times more).
So yeah, I have an idea. Do you?
Here it was blatent murder
A person was killed. Whether it was murder or manslaughter, is not up to you to decide because you have no degree in law in France.
and if it wasn’t for the video leaked on social media the cop would face absolutely no consequences.
Ok, so the cop will face consequences now. Isn't that the goal? Why hurt other people that have nothing to do with it? Your reasoning is completely absent here.
When justice fail, the social contract is broken
Who is gonna carry out justice for all the assholes that hurt people in these riots? Shall we play the escalation game just to satisfy your weird revenge boner?
When the social contract is broken, there is no peace or discussion.
So your solution is to escalate violence endlessly. slow clap
Neither France nor the USA were built on peaceful protests.
You don't know history very well, do you? You're comparing authoritarian regimes with democratic ones now.
So how is the police supposed to stop murderers who threaten to murder them? Care to elaborate your ultimate wisdom?
So you know that there's places where you don't exist? It's called everywhere else, but unfortunately I'm stuck with a dishonest person who keeps on spewing fallacies.
It's not fair to pay money for services to a company involved in unrelated lawsuits? Does the antitrust investigation negate the expenses associated with running the operation of serving you content?
Are all competitors dead? You can switch to watching TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, for random user generated content. You can go to nebula if you want YouTube style documentaries. You can go to any movie platform if you want to watch random stuff. They are all either in the red, backed by VC, waiting to do the same thing, or serving aggressive ads, or selling your data, or costing money.
How much people are willing to pay is irrelevant in the context of fairness. Fairness is about a company breaking even. Customer readiness is however relevant to business, and in this case I'm afraid that the evidence is against you - after countless similar complaints in the past, people haven't left the platform, and people have signed up to pay.
Paying for services is normal. It's unrealistic not to. It's unproductive to pretend otherwise.
Yes. The word "color" is mentioned exactly 0 times in the ancestor nodes above my comment.
And this was not the first
blackperson to be murdered in France by the police like this.
ok racist.
Pattern? What pattern? Do you have any public data to go with that statement, that shows a problem SO BIG with authorities that it justifies violence? In the last years, 15 people have been killed by police in such incidents. 8 police officers have been charged. Without knowing the details about the rest, how can you claim that it's a systemic problem? You know what a systemic problem looks like? More than 2000 people were killed BY cars in the same period. THAT's a systemic problem. For the scale of this problem however, peaceful protests calling for transparency in these cases, and other constructive demands, should be the reaction, and not this. This? This just shows that France is dealing with violence and gives many people the impression that it's OK if police sometimes kill such violent people. I literally had this conversation with the other side, who tried to convince me that the rioters should be shot or something. 17 year old broke the law driving the vehicle, and recklessly tried to speed away from this. The police officer over-reacted (cars do kill people quite a lot) and should be investigated for manslaughter, but what should not happen is this. Why is it so hard to see? Why are y'all so trigger happy? Maybe because it's not your house that was attacked and your family injured? Maybe because it's not your neighbourhood which got trashed and your business looted?
You make it seem like the race matters in this incident. As if a black person killed is different from a pink person killed. You have preferential treatment of problems based on skin color. That is racist.
Keep in mind that privacy is really a recent concept. Human societies never had privacy before the industrial revolution. Everybody knew everybody else and what they were doing. I do want my privacy, but modern technology makes it too easy to create and grow any organization that can rival the state in power. While we do have the power to influence and control the state, we have no power over competing organizations that act like authoritarian states.
There needs to be a balance, an amount of power that the state can exercise, that's just right for keeping it as a monopoly on violence. Absolute privacy, where the state has transparency, is taking away all the power and advantages from the state and gives them to whoever wants to challenge that state.
In other words, nuance.
I get your opinion but you have to account for the fact that it's not Le Pen who's in the chair. And France is actually ranked quite high on the civil liberties. While I get your perspective, I believe that it's exaggerated.
Well OK yeah, for those you just need B&W. Color becomes useful when trying to impress. I've sent rent applications in color specifically because I know that the real estate agents are subjective. Some of the talks that I've held were helped out by coloring my notes while I was presenting. And some home crafts and activities (escape rooms with friends) were helped out several times by the color printer. Given that there isn't a huge price gap in maintenance and initial costs, for me it was worth it.
Also, neither the OP nor the comment I was replying to mentioned anything about color. I was specifying stuff about printers in general.
Umm, actually it did. The solution to a problem is to first acknowledge it. The problem is being an asshole that can't let a day go by without rubbing something in.
The YouTube problem? For me it's not a problem any more than anything else price-related. It's interesting to see who is affected by the change and whether it impacts actual customers. What's not interesting is seeing a long string of whinging and schadenfreude from people who strongly believe that it's wrong to pay for services and who have not spent a cent on this. That's ok, believe what you want, but don't be an asshole about it.
I wasn't replying to anything that mentioned color.
What a cesspit of racists promoting violence. I did not expect this. I expected people who value safety and civility. There are protests and there are riots. There's justice and there's setting fire to the mayor's house, injuring his family. There's a democratic state, and an angry mob destroying stuff. There's innocent kid, and an unknown individual at the wheel of a ton of high-speed steel illegally in a city full of people. These "cars" by the way, have the biggest violent death toll in developed countries. Guns? Heck no!
I am so disappointed.
Do you feel better after making fun of people who use other devices and not just a smartphone and browser? There are a hundred news that aren't your problem and you don't comment there, but you make sure to come in here and "rub it in" to people who care about this, by not providing an actual solution.
Very noble.
Read the article. Title is clickbait. It's only with approval from a judge. You know, alternatively they could just arrest and imprison the person, which is what every country is doing. Not saying it's without worrying, but there's important nuance that most are missing.
P.S.
Absolute extremist attitudes like "nobody should be able" and so on, have absolutely no place in modern society. There's always nuance. Libertarianism doesn't work, and laws must be enforced. It sucks, but when there are forces that want to hurt people and destabilize societies, you can't go by the rule that everyone is a saint. The world will punish this attitude.
Yes, the world isn't perfect, but for ducks sake, quit sensationalizing anecdotes and representing them as "this always happens". That's dishonest.