I agree in this case, but not every author is a good reader, and even when they are, their voice isn't always the right voice. I love Stephen King to death, but I'll pass on him reading The Stand. Meanwhile, I wouldn't listen to On Writing read by anyone else.
"It has a cool default theme for Gnome, and there's a colored bash prompt."
The "cool default theme" in Fedora is the default Gnome theme. There isn't a "colored bash prompt." Fedora is a major distribution on par with stuff like Arch and Debian, so news about Fedora is news about linux.
Love Fedora, hate Fedora, I couldn't care less. But at least do a little research.
As far as I can tell, "hyperpolic" is a typo, and you meant "hyperbolic", which kinda fits, but it would be "contains a hyperbolic statement," rather than "contains hyperbole." It would be less clear, though, since "hyperbolic" can refer to either "hyperbole" or "hyperbola".
Meanwhile hyperbole refers only to a figure of speech and not potentially an open curve with two branches.
…
Sorry, did I ruin your joke? I ruined your joke didn't I. Man, I just can't stop myself from being a pedantic jackass…
Oh, I agree it's a leap. It's just slightly less of a leap than complaining about the NSA. I'm not saying you're wrong about the knee-jerk reaction some Americans have to Chinese tech and China in general.
It's just that the sputtering nonsense makes very slightly more sense after you mentioned the ban in the original post. You opened a crack in the door, is what I'm saying, and if an American Jingoist Asshat can get his head in the crack, he's gonna get all the way in.
Well, it doesn't really, except that you mentioned the US trade ban, which brings the reason for the US trade ban into the topic at least tangentially.
Oh, I care about Five (Seven, Nine) Eyes every bit as much as I care about China, I assure you. But in a thread about a Chinese company's new tech, it would be a bit weird to complain about NSA data mining. Kinda off topic, if you see what I mean.
Here's the thing, YouTube. When you first started running ads, I didn't really mind. They were short, there weren't that many, and if they were particularly annoying or repetitive, there was a skip button. I respected that you needed to make money and that you wanted to pay the content creators, and you respected my time.
But then you decided to flood the fucking platform and cut the revenue share with the creators. Without adblock, I can't watch a 5 minute video without 5 minutes of ads. You're trying to force me into paying for your premium service by annoying me to death.
Which I might do if I thought the people whose videos I actually like got a decent share of the revenue. But they don't. Hell, at least one of my favorite YouTubers is regularly demonetized, so they wouldn't see a penny.
So, YouTube, I'll keep blocking ads and use services like Patreon to support my favorite YouTube folks the best I can. And if you won't let me use adblock? Well, I guess I have to find some other way to occupy that hour or so a week I use your service, because I'm sure as shit not using half of it to watch ads that don't benefit the people whose videos I enjoy.
Yes. I get that, because I have the historical context. But nothing in the article directly says that, so to someone without the context, it doesn't say anything about it.
I'm not being obtuse, I just think that unless your intent is preaching to the choir, the article isn't a good choice without supporting context. And I'd appreciate it if you didn't insult me just because you don't like what I have to say. I'm not even disagreeing with the central premise, just how you're presenting your message, so maybe ease up on the ad hominem.
ETA: just realized you're not OP. Sorry about that.
Kinda feel like this article is more about racism, imperialism, and colonization than it is about capitalism. Capitalism might have motivated the racsim, but if you know not view a group of people as being human, then bad shit is gonna happen regardless of the economic system.
I agree in this case, but not every author is a good reader, and even when they are, their voice isn't always the right voice. I love Stephen King to death, but I'll pass on him reading The Stand. Meanwhile, I wouldn't listen to On Writing read by anyone else.