I feel like DVDs/Blurays already disappeared 10 years ago and are now making a comeback. Same for CDs. Streaming services don't let you own anything, and if they pull something down, you're SOL. Self hosting Plex and ripping my own disks has given me a level of freedom not possible with netflix et. al. Especially since DVDs are considered garbage to most people now, you can set up your own streaming service for you and your friends and family for cheap. No piracy necessary.
Given recent performances I think most boxing fans won't mind seeing him being escorted back across the border
Am I the only one who thinks this is unsportsmanlike to say? If someone is worth fighting against inside the ring, then they're worth fighting with outside the ring.
Paramount being capitalist is a red herring. That would have been the case regardless of trump being corrupt. Settling the extortion payment had to happen for them to stop being harassed. The fact that they want to stop being harassed....so that they can continue doing the same capitalist bullshit they would have done regardless is irrelevant. It's not the flip side of an extortion coin, it's a completely separate unethical practice to try to confuse and divide criticism. This is step one in fostering a "both sides" argument.
I feel like this thread is somehow interpreting the "bribery" payment as malicious on Paramount's part. If a corrupt cop is going to arrest you for made up charges unless you grease his palms, you're not being malicious or unethical, you're not somehow getting something out of the exchange that you otherwise wouldn't have, you're just being extorted by a corrupt cop.
Easy: VPN license. Corporations already don't like when customers use VPNs to get around their geo locks on content. We're one lobbying push away from courts broadly interpreting use of a VPN as a malicious violation of DMCA or CFAA.
Unfortunately, the phenomenon of social dogma that gives rise to religion has an evolutionary advantage. It's how you get a bunch of people to focus on a common ends without spending too much time and energy being critical of the means. Humans who rally unquestioningly behind some percieved commonality get stuff done, regardless of how ethical it is. It's why the Catholic church is immune to "cancel culture". If any other modern institution had a documented history of figureheads systematically abusing children, they would be finished. But if everyone involved can say "that's just the actions of a few evil individuals, they don't represent my faith," then they've achieved social immunity.
I honestly believe that until we see a belief system that emphasizes human dignity over corporate profits, we will continue our race to the bottom of capitalism. This isn't something a democracy "reasons" its way out of, because falsifiable beliefs based in reason will always lose some argument (by design).
I think the Japanese religion of Shinto is pretty close to a best case scenario for a religion. It's actually really fascinating. At its core is a belief that a spirit or godlike entity inhabits every single thing, living or inanimate, so you should treat everything with the respect of a divine being. But what you wouldn't expect is, most people don't literally believe these gods exist, they just see that practicing the religion makes their society better. In the west, we have a huge number of "non-practicing religious" people, but in Japan there is a huge number of "shinto-practicing non-religious" people. Combined with the fact that it (somehow) doesn't have any figurehead trying to coopt it, it's basically exclusively a net win for their society.
Btw abolishing religion is also be the quickest way to convince a bunch of people to start/join a religion.
He switched to linux a while back. Now he's trying to switch as much of the rest of his digital life to FOSS/non-profit stuff. He advocates for duckduckgo, firefox, paid email, graphene os, selfhosted vaultwarden, nextcloud, anything but google maps, kodi, etc.
Yeah, the question I don't know the answer to is, what is the hard limit to the market's greed? In a hypothetical scenario where every single trader successfully agrees to maintain their positions and continue buying shares at inflated speculative prices so that the market holds its value (apparently where we find ourselves) at what point does that strategy catch up to them? If the greed manages to never shifts toward fear, can the market sustain this indefinitely? Or is there some point where speculation has to manifest actual gains?
I guess that point is when traders can no longer afford speculation? Which probably translates to: boomers retiring and cashing out their 401k.
I feel like DVDs/Blurays already disappeared 10 years ago and are now making a comeback. Same for CDs. Streaming services don't let you own anything, and if they pull something down, you're SOL. Self hosting Plex and ripping my own disks has given me a level of freedom not possible with netflix et. al. Especially since DVDs are considered garbage to most people now, you can set up your own streaming service for you and your friends and family for cheap. No piracy necessary.