![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/41e39366-cb91-4d4a-bc07-a47621cb7d5f.jpeg)
News used to be 60 minutes just after prime time. Now they have whole channels with news 24/7/365. Have to fill all that air time with something
News used to be 60 minutes just after prime time. Now they have whole channels with news 24/7/365. Have to fill all that air time with something
I know you’ve probably heard this about a dozen times by now, but…
Don’t join Facebook.
They track everything they can about you, down to how long you spend looking at something on your screen. I’m fairly certain they listen to what’s going on around you if you put the app on your phone. An ad for something I’ve mentioned in passing has popped up on my feed shortly later too many times to be a coincidence.
They follow you around on your browser, too. They know what you shop for. It’s all specially tailored to sell you their ads.
I keep an account to stay in touch with my family, and it’s appalling how much more information they get from you than any other app. Not to mention the heavy prevalence of MAGA hats and I’ll-kill-you-before-I-consider-your-opinion conservatives.
Instagram isn’t much better, but at least the people there are nicer.
Anyone reading this thread and genuinely interested in it should go listen to the dollop podcast. It’s American history, mostly between the 1500’s and now. But the different episodes they do are stuffed full of this kind of faulty logic from the past.
Look into the death of George Washington. His doctor responded to what could have been a mild cold by taking a liter of blood 4 separate times from him. Washington very well could have recovered if he was just left alone.
Oh, and the doctor somewhat realized his mistake and tried to put some of the blood back after(!) Washington expired, with the logic that if blood loss killed him giving it back should revive him.
So yeah. Pumping blood back into a dead man. That was done on the founding president of the United States.
Was listening to an American history podcast (the dollop) about the radium girls. They wore uranium infused lipstick because it glowed and they thought it was cute. They licked their fingers regularly to help apply uranium dust to things.
While their male supervisors were wearing full lead suits totally for no reason and let those girls do that.
Many of them lost their jaws. There was a suit filed that they won, but every single one of those girls died before they could collect the money.
The suit led to a law establishing workers’ safety rights, so it wasn’t all bad. But that law was definitely written in those girls’ blood.
My argument was that you can’t claim the moral high ground based on legality alone. I understand that nuance exists in the context, but moral high ground does not come from whether or not it’s legal.
I see what you’re getting at, but I think ‘moral high ground’ might not be the phrase you’re looking for.
Laws and morals are explicitly different. That’s why juries exist, so that a law may be put against the morals of a situation and the morals may prevail if need be.
Breaking the law isn’t necessarily immoral. It’s just illegal. So it isn’t like someone breaking the law is seeking to take the moral high ground in the first place, nor does that mean that someone who only ever follows the law always has the moral high ground. Lawful-evil does exist.
Maybe that’s the point. Unity caves immediately to the big lawyers and says “Sorry guys, we tried. Looks like all you little studios will have to pay up after all. Blame Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft”
I bought my oneplus 10 pro for sub $500 during a sale, and it has usb3.1. It’s last year’s model. You can get a pixel 6 with usb3.1 for less than $400. A Galaxy S21 has usb3.2, less than $500.
That’s almost every major android brand for $500 or less with 3.1 or better. The cheapest you can buy an iPhone 15, the one with usb2.0, is $800. What are you on about?
You’re a housing provider, not a landlord. If you aren’t making anything off of the houses you lease then you aren’t the subject of the ire of renters.
Ignore those goons saying you’re a bad investor. It’s noble of you to not leech off of the people who you rent to, and at the end of the day, the equity of the house is still yours.
deleted by creator
And soon, the carrier pigeon breeders will start tagging them with tracking chips…
deleted by creator
It’s psyops, nothing more. They perceive it as “playing the west’s game” in a double bid to stoke their own citizens and trip up NATO counterparts by using “western” language against them.
The right in this context is invented: A projection of hard power through the lip service of soft power.
This is a form of slippery slope fallacy. Rich in this context refers to portion of society contributing to pollution on a massively higher scale than even an upper middle class American. How many ‘rich’ Americans regularly fly private jets or take yachts? How many average joes own and operate a cruise line or a refinery?
I think with regards to poorer people in other countries, they’d be on the same page with 99.99% of Americans about who’s considered so rich that they alone pose a threat to global health.
Uh huh. I’m sure that the problem ruining sites like this is people pointing out when someone else is being rude.
Anyway, a second “no u” is certainly not a surprise. Lashing out over some simple advice, name calling instead of making a point, presuming I just don’t understand you and acting like your opinion is any better by virtue of it being yours. All of these things reek of terminally online culture.
No, I get what you’re trying to say. I understand that you also have an opinion on what makes sites like this bad. I’m also just saying you’re wrong. Call me whatever you like, the fact is that people don’t respect an asshole. You can try to be less of one, or you can just continue shouting into the void.
Either way, later tater.
Oh, like a little kiss
Oh good, the quintessential “no u”. Another reddit staple. Ironically, that sounds like an anecdote and is therefore inadmissible by your logic.
The first step is to make it illegal to sideload “illegal” apps. It’s the step that sounds reasonable that less informed people might agree with or at least not protest. The next step is to arbitrarily decide what makes an app illegal. By that point, it’s too late to protest the actual law.
It’s like the law in Florida making the punishment death for sexual assault on a child. That sounds fine until you realize that their legislature has announced their intent to make wearing clothes opposite your gender in public into sexual assault on a child.
Unilateral restrictive laws, without specific stipulations or conditions, even innocent sounding ones like this, are one bad actor away from being changed to a political weapon.
Not for the corporations that make money off of extorting a basic necessity from poor people! Won’t someone think of the corporations?