DogMuffins @ DogMuffins @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

5

Comments

1,190

Joined

2 yr. ago

The thing is though, it's crazy effective.

Yeah, you're right.

I mean if you were the landlord, an awesome landlord, you wouldn't discount the rent over something like this. You'd fix the problems but you wouldn't discount the rent.

You can complain about whatever you want but first you need to figure out what it is that you want.

If you just say "its unsafe" they will just come by and say "it's safe now".

Definitely assholery but perhaps not discrimination in a legal sense - but that will be heavily dependent on wherever you are and possibly not answerable outside of court.

No. Whoever wrote this doesn't understand bankruptcy.

If things got really bad creditors would take control and sell the business to shareholders who would install a clean CEO who would entice advertisers back.

No one would utter the b-word.

It's market value is nil if there are no advertisers.

they workshopped it and found that the word had the right balance of motivation & positive vibes while conveying little meaning.

They always just get tossed aside at the first slip up.

... with a bonus of a few billion.

Wow that's nuts.

This doesn't reflect my experience at all.

The article says that the app description said something about "killing children".

It's not really surprising google removed it. I mean they could've just edited the description or whatever but... policy I guess.

Sounds like it will be back any minute.

I love this so hard ❤️

This opinion contradicts the polls though right?

I mean it's a shitty headline and I dislike the use of the term "inevitable", but polls suggest that voters are eager for a Trump dictatorship.

Aparently not?

There's plenty of logical reasons to deny him another term, but none of it seems to matter.

In Australia there are different species which are endangered or plentiful.

I think that's the point though. It's subjective.

Many people think the phrase applies to them because paycheck to paycheck is their budget cycle. They're not living hand to mouth.

Getting sick of saying that it's not the link, it's the preview.

An AI generated article would still need source material.

Anyway, what would be the appeal of a platform that couldn't link anything but just showed AI content?

The way I see it, journalism is more or less dead. A shade of the former institution. There doesn't seem many other ways to fund journalistic endeavour.

As I replied to the other commenter:

If it were just a link then there wouldn't be any problem. Users would follow the link to the publisher's web site. I think the problem is that facebook et al scrape the content and show cards and summaries and then user's don't visit the publisher's web site. They're getting paid for their content, for being linked.

If it were just a link then there wouldn't be any problem. Users would follow the link to the publisher's web site. I think the problem is that facebook et al scrape the content and show cards and summaries and then user's don't visit the publisher's web site. They're getting paid for their content, for being linked.