Kinglink @ Kinglink @lemmy.world

Posts

6

Comments

280

Joined

2 yr. ago

Unfortunately people like things for free, so "Free" means faster user acquisition.

But what really sucks is now everything feels like it's a microtransaction haven.. It's not just "subscriptions" but "Ad ons" and more.

Paying for a program feels almost dead, paying for a service is on the way out, because you're now paying to be on a ad supported service, and they'll keep trying to push that as "how it should be".

There are 18 year olds who have never bought a piece of software before. And there's probably plenty that have only purchased games. Push Xbox Game Pass more and we may even have people who never bought anything, because the modern world isn't about you "Owning" anything, it's about leasing, licensing, and reoccurring payments.

My comments were about principles,

So absolutely has no value in this discussion, thanks for clarifying.

The link has some of the things he said that are clearly not so innocuous as you seem to portray given the rise of the right wing.

I didn't click this link, because I don't really care. My father was Jewish, and he could say all Jewish people should be killed and I still would say he doesn't deserve to be put in jail. Sorry, your outrage doesn't override the first amendment. It's not "It's a joke" defense.. it's "There's freedom of speech". Hard stop. Are their limitations to it? Sure, but I'm pretty sure he's not hitting those bars.

You are misinformed

No you're talking about "Principles" which means you're in the wrong topic and the wrong discussion. And you're not misinformed, but willfully ignoring the reality of the situation. Maybe you're angry you're not right and you're trying to defend your position, but here's the thing, your position doesn't matter, the law matters... And no one is keeping score, so it's ok, you're wrong here, just stop making up shit.

at worst are resorting to the usual alt right talking points.

I always love this point. "If you don't agree with me, you're the enemy." I guess the ACLU is the Alt-Right, as is any lawyer who defends someone charged with saying something that hurt someone's feelings.

As for "priorities". If you think freedom of speech isn't important, let's think about that. It's great right now, Nazi's can't say shit, you can say anything you want to them. But what's that, a future where someone you don't like is in power, and suddenly you can't say anything and some party (potentially Nazis) can.... Oh shit, well maybe Freedom of Speech IS actually important.

As a matter of principle,

I'll repeat this again, "principles" don't matter, laws do.

which is that I do not place the ultimate value on freedom of speech

That's fine, but we're all talking about an American case, let's focus on American laws, and not "What dublet feel is right".

This is the last time I'm responding to you because you've made it clear you're talking about the world according you. I live in a real place, with actual laws, where this case is taking place. It's called the United States of America. It doesn't matter where you live, it doesn't matter what laws apply to you. We're talking about a specific place and specific laws. When you want to talk about those laws... well find someone else because you've already wasted enough of my time, but until you focus on how the world actually works, really no one should waste their time discussing your version of the law... because it has no basis in reality.

Spotify has definitely helped me to discover new artists, but then I mostly listen to that artist on Spotify (Mostly because I'm not in their country.)

Oh pretending you were always talking about US when BOTH of your previous links are from the UK? Come on bro...

And you're citing a law and not considering how it's applied for the last couple centuries or even years. In very broad terms, you can't just claim they said something inflamatory and that person did something. For the most part they need to be rather specific for that law to apply.

"Someone should do something about that mosque" isn't the same as saying "Someone should blow up that specific mosque". And almost every time this comes up the radicalization knows how to avoid going over the line. But if I posted a message that said "someone should blow up that mosque" It would be myself that would get in trouble, not lemmy, or Youtube or where ever I posted it.

The problem is "Solicit, command, induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade" That's usually far more specific than you seem to think. It's part of the way organized crime was able to survive so long, until RICO cases were made, and those cases basically bypass this by saying there's a (Criminal) "enterprise".

The other problem you have is complaining about the "Algorithm" but not understanding that itself would likely be a defense in that it's designed to promote retention, not radicalization, but that would even assume it'll get to court, which in this case it'll almost certainly not. The fact they're not going after a specific person probably means they're targeting a vague "radicalization" which hey, you have a good point in your first link. The radicalization would be illegal under UK law. But if he did in the US, he likely would not be in jail.

But then again we don't jail people for teaching dogs to do the nazi salute, so yeah, strange. We have different laws here that I still don't think you understand.

This is more akin to if you sold a fatty food in a supermarket and someone died from being overweight.

Radicalizing someone to do this isn't a crime. Freedom of speech isn't absolute but unless someone gives them actual orders it would still be protected.

Don't apply UK's lack of freedom of speech in American courts.

LIght a fire.

Two possibilities, no more Racoon, or a delicious flame broiled Racoon.

Shit I forgot "Racoon drops out of the chimney, lights tail on file, runs around house like a racoon with a tail on fire, and burns down your house..." so three possibilities

Is anyone surprised?

We knew they could do automatic captions (Don't know why don't offer that standard any more). We know they monitor what's in the video, meaning the words. We know this was an automated system.

I don't even think there's an ounce of anything new here to anyone who has been paying attention.

Are we getting Spotify for free, if we're buying premium?

The problem is you can't "buy" products any more. Companies see that as interest, and then start to throw additional advertising to see how much they can get away with. Fuck that shit.

They've also run almost any way to do it outside of their ecosystems. If I want to listen to happy hardcore music, I have to hope spotify has it, but it's rare to find that on most playlists, I'd have to go spend thousands of dollars for the same experience that Spotify offers, and that's to own every track I'm even curious about.

They're also "magnets" for progressive, liberal, conservative and all other crazies and normal people. That's mostly because everyone uses them. It's the most popular video sharing site and (one of?) the most popular social media site.

Ahh one of those "We're mad and we don't have anyone to be angry with." style lawsuits. Pretty much the Hail Mary from a lawyer who is getting their name in the paper but knows it won't go anywhere.

"Easy to remove gun lock" that has been tried multiple times and usually fails. "Gun lock" doesn't seem to be related to assault weapons and large capacity magazine but who knows what they mean, even when a gun is "Easily modifiable" it's usually not treated as illegal, because someone has to actually make those modifications. The same will probably be the case for the kevlar. (at the time of the shooting it was legal).

Youtube contributing to radicalization is a laugh, it's an attempt to get their name in the papers and will be dismissed easily. They'd have better chance to name the channels that radicalized him, but first amendment rights would be near absolute here. Besides which "Radicalization" isn't the same as a conspiracy or orders. It's the difference between someone riling up the crowd until they're in a fervor which ends up in a riot, and someone specifically telling people how to riot and who to target. (Even if can be tried as crimes, one is a conspiracy, one is not, and even that "radicalization" would be neither.) Even "I wish someone would go shoot up ..." would be hyperbole, and thrown out as well. It's pretty hard to break the first amendment protections in America (And that's a good thing, if you think it's not imagine if the other party is in power and wants to squash your speech... yeah let's keep that amendment in place).

The same will be the case against Facebook for all the same reasons.

If you think Google should be responsible, then you think the park that someone is radicalized in should be responsible for what's said in it, or the email provider is responsible for every single piece of mail that is sent on it, even though it might not have access to see that mail... it's a silly idea even assuming they could even do that. Maybe they're hoping to scare Google to change it's algorithm, but I doubt that will happen either.

The case against the parents is another one that people try and again... unless there's more than their saying, you still can't sue someone for being a bad parent. Hell there's a better case against the parents of Ethan Crumbley, and even that cases is still pretty shaky, and involved the parents actively ignoring every warning sign, and buying the kid the gun. This there's nothing that seems to be pinnable on the parents.

You know it sucks and I know there's a lot of hurt people but lawsuits like this ultimately fail because it's like rolling the dice, but history pretty much shows this is hoping for a one in a million chance that they get lucky, and they won't, because it's one in a million, and then they'd have to hope it's not overturned even if they do win.

There's probably bullshit jobs.

But there's probably a lot that you think are "Bullshit jobs" and really you mean "I don't see what they do" I thought "Scrum master" was a joke of a title for someone to do fuck all. Then I had to take over for my scrum master for 2 weeks. Holy shit, that was the most eye opening experience. He's in 6 hours of meetings a day, talking to management, designing future work, working on requirements, dealing with the minutia, dealing with three different PMs who need work done by us, and prioritizing their requests to get everything done, assisting everyone on and off the team, and basically keeping the 6 of us on the team from dealing with what we would call "Annoying pointless shit" which is actually really important for other people.

My scrum master talks about "Seeing the bigger picture" and I get it now. But the thing is it'd also be really easy for someone to think he has a "Bullshit job"... but he's also the reason we work 40 hour weeks and not 80 hours.

Does anyone have stats on Afghanistan's opinions on America's occupation right before we left? I imagine most of them wanted America to leave...

Though I'm now curious what their TRUE opinion was of the Taliban, because I see people wanting Communism back in Russia, I imagine people wanted the Taliban back instead of the Americans.

I'm sure at least 50 percent of them are like "Fuck no" (women), but when that group isn't a huge part of the people guarding the country, I wonder if this was inevitable. Even if we somehow destroyed the entire Taliban, there would be another fundamental Islamic group who wanted to take over.

I wonder if it was "hard" or "I want the Taliban to take over." There's probably a decent amount of people in that area that can fundamentally agree with the Taliban. it's a religious and oppression group. If you're ideologically aligned with the Taliban, and male, you're probably either as good or better of under them.

Not saying this is everything but I imagine there's at least some people who are ok with the new government, mostly because they don't care about others over their own self.

I'm not surprised.

Hell I'm pretty sure people are forgetting Ukraine is at war. This is why I hated the "They're winning" "Russia is retreating" rhetoric. Because wars take a long time and a lot of people will die in them. People are cheering something they have no part in but by saying "Ukraine is winning" I think many of them also add "And now we can stop focusing on them".

Part of it is the media diverting attention or focusing on what they want people to focus on (watch how coverage of different shootings are covered. If it's a white guy with a death toll, it's covered far more than if it's a woman, a non-minority, or a low death toll. People will defend that by "It's focusing on the higher death toll" But doesn't focus on the coverage changes based on race, gender, or if it's a gang/drug related shooting.

Part of this is click bait but I think part of it too is a narrative that's formed. Which is why school shootings are covered more than random alleys and such. But the reason why isn't the problem, it's more how the media shapes the national narrative due to what they decide to focus on.

The other part is people have enough going on in their life that they can't think of every little thing going on in the world, but since the news is covering this, I guess we'll focus a bit on Afghanistan for a bit again.

You nailed it. It's artificially deflated prices, and dishonest..

Would be the last time I visited them.

I tip twenty most places. Easy to calculate and fair.

I see this and they have gotten my tip. If you work there and are upset by that, then you need to find another job because the company is stealing your tips no matter what. And I personally won't return, because it's never the best restaurants who pull this shit.

Similarly if a company puts automatic gratuity on my bill that's the tip as well.... And usually it's less than I'd give freely.

If Americans are supposed to tip extra it their choice. If you want to define service charges or something like this, then you've made your choice. Greedy fucks trying to hide these extra charges need to stop. I'll pay more for food on a menu if that's what it takes but trying to sneak it is bullshit.

That's just in general the problem with the Internet. I'd love pics groups to be just user created pics. But unfortunately it seems like people think they can screen grab, download, or just link to any picture on the internet with no attribution or proof they have the rights to use it.

People seem to wake up when you post every picture from a comic book or manga but I wonder if someone took every photograph or painting by a famous artist and posted it. I imagine most people would highly upvotes that instead of calling it out for what it is.

The word was porn. Lemmy world already federated from at least one server in regards to CP. But fear of CP isn't enough to block all porn. Piracy though is always illegal and that's why it's more strict than some titties and ass.

Some form (most forms?) of porn are legal in most places. Piracy isn't legal in most places.

I'm not defending porn or saying piracy is bad, but legally I understand they don't want to open themselves up to liability.

It'd be lovely if we could start codifying abandonware... or better yet, return copyright law to reasonable lengths (20 years)

The biggest thing is simply. "Lemmy.world "...

If someone really is that upset, create your own instance. Find an instance that agrees with you and swap it. I'm not anti-piracy, but this seems like a fundamental difference between you and Lemmy World, that essentially means you should find a different instance.

(or go create an account on a piracy server and here if that's what it takes)