Further I’d have to say, that’s actually MORE ethical than blocking ads.
Pirating via bit torrent or any indirect source. Hulu, youtube, or whatever spends $0 delivering the movie to you. Technically they spent nothing on you and their only loss is the hypothetical what you might have spent if you found it worth it.
On the other hand, adblocking… actually does cost them. They are hosting, so they are paying for the bandwidth to deliver the stream to you.
For an analogy I suppose, bittorrenting is a bit like copying recipes to cook for yourself or family and friends at home. Technically it’s illegal but it doesn’t cost them anything.
Alternatively… blocking the ads is a bit like walking into a restraunt, grabbing free bread, then dashing.
Yeah… here in America if someone wants to steal your briefcase… they are probably going to shoot you first. At which point… there’s not much point to the antics of booby trapping the briefcase because the thief has no time crunch.
(also why the standard security for super important briefcases in america is handcuffing it to your wrists. Because it’s really hard to blend into a crowd dragging behind a dead 6’2 guy in a suit.
IMO I think a lot of socialists need to focus on… well coming up with more solutions to the collapse of the soviet union. I’m not an expert on it, but I know enough basic history to know… the soviet union imploded. Fact is a lot of the first world capitalist countries are stuck in the propoganda of “we tried it, it failed”. The reality is like every system and every event in history, they did some good things and some bad things, and a propor system takes the good, refines it, finds the bad parts and cut it out.
At least to my really limited history knowledge, I’m sure a large part of it was the dick waving contest with the US and capitalist countries. Obviously Lysenkoism was an extreme case of horrid stupidity that made the food supply chains 100x worse.
The point is, if we want to sell the world on communism, we can’t just point to things and say “See USSR did this, and it was good”, without making a case for it having done good in the USSR, and not allow it to be assumed to be part of the collapse of the USSR.
Oh he’s hated pretty much, go to any gamer space and start discussion about the Epic Store.
I’m lost on that… I mean steam is kind of almost everyone’s example of a store done right. Hell valve single handedly gets credit for basically making linux gaming viable today. Meanwhile epic can be credited for literally doing the opposite (IE making rocket league DROP linux support).
Now in valid criticism of valve, I could say they certainly deserve some blame for basically creating a ton of IPs, and then sitting on them for years, while basically letting steam print money for them (Why make a game when you can get a cut from every game ever sold).
So yeah I can fully see valve getting some blame for well basically not pushing forward on making… well (insert any valve game, 3)
Honestly the real problem though… is the double edged problem. Sadly the majority of people that are censored… are ones that no one wants to listen to, self admitted white supremacists, Flat earthers, anti vax, school shooting deniers etc…
The problem is in the ideal world, those types aren’t censored, but are burried on the simple ground of being outnumbered. But sadly they are a larger fringe than people that just care about free speach… and thus when a platform opens without censorship, instead of representing the actual reality, it disproportionately gets overtaken by the hateful extremists.
I mean… kinda duh? By definition every corporation revolves around what will get them money. ISPs aren’t giving youtube a cut of the subscription costs… we aren’t paying for youtube premium or whatever they call it. Saying youtube is only interested in throwing us ads, is like saying Jiffy Lube only changes my oil because they want to get paid for it.
Shouldn’t even be a human on the other side.
Capitalist trolly problem is.
We have dozens of levers, each one we pull can save hundreds of thousands to millions of people from avoidable death and extreme harm from climate change, health care etc…
But every lever we pull, might lower the amount of yachts the wealthy can own.
Do we pull any levers?
Honestly I hate touchscreens so much lol. So many of the computers at my work place have touch screens, and it drives me crazy because, I’m often trying to explain to someone OK click here (then my fingernail grazes the screen and clicks it for them)… crap I wanted you to do that so you’d actually learn.
That and then actually using it. It’s imprecise as hell, and to add to the annoyance, you can’t quite tell where you are clicking because, your finger is blocking what you are touching.
Generally speaking the first thing I do is disable the thing if I get a computer with one.
It is, but it also isn’t. We act on the assumption of free will. But really the assumed consequences for ones actions, is obviously one of the things that elminates the control of them. Therefore whether our thoughts are free or not. we would not remove the consequences for ours and other actions because, that would remove a force preventing them from doing things which harm us.
It’s not something I would want (for me I wouldn’t enjoy sex in a transaction situation) , but no assuming consent, both parties being mentally able and un-coerced enough to decide whether the transaction is worth it to both of them. I do not see anything inherently different in those transactions. Now for some having sex is a high psychological toll… for some it is less of a toll, same could be said for painting, for some the physical toll of climbing and painting would totally wreck their bodies and cause serious injury, for some they would be more than able to.
Sex is just an action the human body can do. It comes with risks, it can be enjoyable to some, it can be degrading or painful to some in different situations. I see nothing wrong with anyone chosing to take those actions. There is of course something wrong with people being co-erced, forced to do things they don’t want to do, and not being compensated fairly for what they chose to do.
Can’t say I disagree with you… slaves got paid… in the sense that they had their housing, food etc… covered for them. As wages are dropping to the point where they barely cover enough for, bare minimum housing, and enough food to stay alive… the only real difference is we get to have a different master quarter us than we have making us do the work, the net result is about the same.
See but there’s the point, Assuming the sex worker is, being paid fairly, and chosing to do it for the money, I can’t see it as drastically different than someone doing any other task for the purposes of collecting a paycheck.
Now with both there is the exploitive nature of systems in general. IE a boss, corporation or pimp that takes 90% of the income for the product of other peoples work. Exploitive systems that force people to work in situations which they get only a fraction of the value of their work to the person, under threats of starvation, deportation, homelessness etc…
I still fail to find the killer statement on why sex work is really that different from regular work. Again asside from higher frequency of blatant abusers, and human traffickers forcing people into sex slavery.
But the general idea, cutting out possible abusive bosses, captors etc… on both scenerios.
I fail to see a difference between.
A person, accepting an offer to have sex with someone, in pre-agreed upon ways, for a pre-agreed upon price, doing what she offered to do, and recieving the agreed upon payment on completion.
A person, agreeing to an offer to paint someone’s house, to an agreed upon standard, for an agreed upon price and recieving a payment on completion.
Both of these tasks carry risks, working on a house contains risks of injury from falling, toll on body due to repetitive stress injuries, possible chemical hazards from paint/thinner etc… which also can be factored into the price. As the sex worker has risks of diseases etc…
Now yes, in either situation if human trafficking is involved. If the person painting the house, or having sex is not actually free, is actually working under threat of death and the payment is going to some other person, that is a horrific situation.
But my point is the actual nature of transactionally “selling your body”. In which case, both of these situations are more or less doing the exact same thing. It’s effectively renting yourself, accepting the damage you are doing to your body in the process of this activity, giving up your time doing a task you probably are not enjoying in this context (though there’s nothing wrong with it if you do enjoy the task even in this context), in exchange for money.
If you have to pay someone to have sex with you, they don’t actually want to have sex with you. If you’re still willing to take advantage, you’re a rapist. Simple as that.
How is that different than say… if you have to pay someone to tar your roof, they don’t want to tar your roof, If you are willing to take advantage you are a slaver?
Now don’t get me wrong, sex work has much worse track record of abuse than manual labor, though I would also say it’s quite probable that is because of it’s underground nature… criminalized things attract criminals, same way that illegal marijuana results in drug dealing groups that commit horrible crimes and shootings defending their territories etc…
I think that thousands of young, fit people collapse out of the blue all the time. It much rarer than obese sickly people, of course, but it absolutely is not rare.
Half the US population has gotten the vaccine. So… it’s flat out not even slightly unlikely that in this big old world there’s going to be some cases of sudden cardiac deaths, that came shortly after taking the vaccine, simple statistics. What we actually want to know is trends… can we prove statistically that more people statistically had Sudden cardiac events that got the vaccine, versus people who did not.
Then of course even further, we then have to weigh the risks. If we demonstrate the increase in risk to one aspect from the vaccine, then we have to compare it to the risks of getting covid without the vaccine, and the odds of getting covid, and the fact is, those 2 things are pretty damn demonstrably significant.
So in short the plain and simple response is, for every one case you can show me that “might” be caused there’s 1000 cases of people dying because they didn’t get the vaccine.
While I agree with the general concept, symbols change meaning, and the alt rights absorbtion of pepe, is kind of a thing. No obviously the comic had no offensive meaning when it was made, or when it was popularized.
However now, when moderating discord channels etc. I see someone come in with a pepe picture… I know there’s a 99% chance I’m going to have to boot him as he’s inevitably going to start spouting racist nonsense (I don’t use the pepe to justify the boot, I wait for the person to start breaking the rules, which almost always happens).
So yeah, I have to say on the whole, Pepe is like the Swastika. It was made with a peaceful meaning, it was used peacefully for some time, and now racists have co-opted it to the point where even used in it’s peaceful original means… everyone’s mind can’t go away from the bad actors that used that symbol.
I think the message is being missed, it’s a twist first of all. it’s first pretending to be just in favor of dropping out of school, showing the big success stories of dropping out.
Then of course showing that since you don’t have insane capital + luck + connections + an idea that happens to be right at the perfect time, if you drop out, you’ll probably end up working a dead end crappy job if you drop out.
Then the twist, if you finish school, you’ll probably also work a dead end crappy job anyway. your life is going to suck no matter what.
Least that’s the message I interpret from it. I think the real point of it is, what you do doesn’t really matter.
I’m not really grasping this… as in they want no minimum wage?
I don’t see the problem here, say minimum wage is 30 an hour (crazy excessive hypothetical one), The union can just as easilly negotiate that Much easier safer jobs are 30/hr, which means our guys aren’t going to take a cent under 50/hr.
I’d second that. Perk of a 4 day work week can be great for everyone. though I suppose the problem is culture is kind of revolved around most people having set days off. Would create a challange for say scheduling parties, family gatherings, religious services etc… Though the pluses IMO would be removal of so much conflict when it comes to things. Both be more availability to use, and hours available to work at banks, etc… if we didn’t declare an official “business days”/hours