• 0 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 9th, 2023

help-circle


  • No, I’m arguing against direct quotes from you. Unless you yourself are a strawman.

    Post about it on the internet built upon tech enabled by the said class

    Built by academics to share research, expanded by hobbyists and enthusiasts, and taken over by megacorps. Not “enabled” by billionaires.

    , from devices sold to us by the said class

    Technically true, but only in that billionaires own the workers.

    , in our homes with comforts the existence of which wouldn’t be possible without the said class.

    Untrue. People can live in comfort without the existence of billionaires.

    Then go to work using infrastructure and means we wouldn’t have without the said class,

    Untrue. This is what your taxes pay for. Transit infrastructure exists without billionaires. Even in the US, notoriously a horrible place to travel, public transit infrastructure was good until billionaires lobbied against good infrastructure so they could sell more cars. Car infrastructure costs you more than public transit.

    likely doing work we wouldn’t have without the said class.

    Possibly true in very specific cases where your work provides value only to billionaires. If your work provides value in any other way (eg providing services or goods), this is likely not true.

    Perhaps go buy some food the likes of which we couldn’t dream of having access to without the said class.

    I am fully certain you don’t really believe good food only exists because of billionaires. Has there ever been a civilization of any kind which hasn’t had chefs of some description?

    Maybe indulge in a hobby - a leisurely distraction, the kind that only exists because the said class engineered a world where you have time and resources to waste on frivolity, while they decide what those resources are.

    Hobbies have always existed. You have time and resources to spare because of unions, not billionaires.

    You credited all of these things to billionaires. None of these things exist because of billionaires.




  • I think the issue you’re having is that you’re treating them as categories and subcategories, like most things it’s never that clean. It makes much more sense if you treat them as unordered tags. Arcade isn’t a subcategory of tennis.

    Say for instance you had a multiplayer racing simulator game, you could categorise that as multiplayer > racing > sim, but if you have a similar singleplayer game you have single player > racing > sim so clearly those aren’t just subcategories of single/multiplayer.
    You could try sim > racing > multiplayer, but what about your city building sims? Now it’s your middle category that didn’t work right.

    If they’re independent tags sim, racing, multiplayer you can change any one of them independently. If any one tag changes that changes how the game is played.







  • “Jaywalking” is mostly a US thing made up by car companies to victim-blame pedestrians when they were killed by cars so they could avoid regulation themselves. Where I am we were taught very early in school how to safely cross a road safely, and pedestrians waiting to cross or already crossing a road generally have right of way even when no signals exist. It’s only an issue in backwards countries where cars have more rights than people and cities are designed for them instead.

    I cross without a signal daily because otherwise I’d have to walk all the way around the block to get to a crossing going the opposite direction from where I’d want to go then find a way to circle all the way back at other crossings. That would make leaving the house more than a little inconvenient, especially since everything I’d need is in walking distance so I rarely drive. To my knowledge I have not been killed by a car a single time.

    Edit: Thanks for the downvote, doesn’t change the facts.

    The very word jaywalk is an interesting—and not historically neutral—one. Originally an insult against bumptious “jays” from the country who ineptly gamboled on city sidewalks, it was taken up by a coalition of pro-automobile interests in the 1920s, notes historian Peter D. Norton in his book Fighting Traffic. “Before the American city could be physically reconstructed to accommodate automobiles, its streets had to be socially reconstructed as places where cars belong,” he writes. “Until then, streets were regarded as public spaces, where practices that endangered or obstructed others (including pedestrians) were disreputable. Motorists’ claim to street space was therefore fragile, subject to restrictions that threatened to negate the advantages of car ownership.” And so, where newspapers like the New York Times once condemned the “slaughter of pedestrians” by cars and defended the right to midblock crossings—and where cities like Cincinnati weighed imposing speed “governors” for cars—after a few decades, the focus of attention had shifted from marauding motorists onto the reckless “jaywalker.”

    Tom Vanderbilt, Slate.com



  • I’m not sure how that’s relevant? If the default folder was “Camera” or “Pictures” or whatever else your malware would just scan those directories and any real attack likely already does. You’ve only described how having malware on your machine compromises your machine, not exactly a groundbreaking revelation.

    Windows hasn’t been my main os for a while but I’m fairly certain you can mount/unmount drives without rebooting. That’s certainly the case on Linux, and my distro definitely tells me what processes are locking drives when applicable.




  • On your end there’s not much to consider here. You can let them know they refunded the entire order, chances are they’ll just write it off. If they ask you to send it back it should be entirely at their expense, do not pay to send it back.

    On their end there’s more going on. It sounds like they charged you for an item they knowingly did not ship then claimed the refund was already in progress when you complained. They also gave you a damaged item and claimed to be unable to refund that, which in most developed countries would be a breach of consumer regulations. This sounds an awful lot like that company is attempting to scam people.




  • Am I misreading this or are their arguments all complete nonsense? From what I can see in the article they have:

    1. They have to allow third-party headphones, i.e. the anti-monopoly policy prevents a monopoly.

    Among the requirements of the DMA is that Apple ensures that headphones made by other brands will work with iPhones. It said this has been a block on it releasing its live translation service in the EU as it allows rival companies to access data from conversations, creating a privacy problem.

    1. Other companies will “twist laws” to prevent competition, i.e. exactly what Apple is trying to do by removing regulation. I don’t see any way to interpret this other than an outright lie, anti-monopoly policies encourage competition.

    Apple said that under the DMA, “instead of competing by innovating, already successful companies are twisting the law to suit their own agendas – to collect more data from EU citizens, or to get Apple’s technology for free”.

    1. Porn exists? I don’t even know what they’re trying to say with this one?

    It said that rules under the act affected the way it provided users access to apps. “Pornography apps are available on iPhone from other marketplaces – apps we’ve never allowed on the App Store because of the risks they create, especially for children,” it said.