Didn’t even offer a refund it sounds like.

“Hey, I know we just fucked up and let a ton of personal information out into the wild. As compensation how would you like to keep using us?”

I will point out there are actually pretty good driverless cars, they just aren’t made by Tesla. Look up Waymo if you want to look into them.

I agree it would be best for Wikipedia to address this on their end, but I have actually no idea where to begin with asking them to make a change like this.

It actually does switch automatically on mobile, just not desktop, which is why I get annoyed enough when it happens to mention it.

Please, anyone who reads this, stop posting links to the mobile version of Wikipedia. It doesn’t switch automatically on PC, and I see it happen all the time. Just take the half a second to remove the “.m” from the beginning of the link, save everyone else from the pain of having to be surprised by it and taking the time to do it themselves.

Perpetual licences have their place, like I’m reasonably confident under the hood you have a perpetual licences for the OS your phone runs on. The point isn’t to get a piece of software that will be updated and supported forever, it’s to get something that works, fits your needs, and that you know can’t just be revoked at the whim of another. Problem is that last one is becoming increasingly untrue.

I mean fuck AT&T, but fuck needless consolidation, pointless service bundling, and revocation of perpetual licences even more.

I for one would be fine with a digital ID to be used for even age verification, so long as it is only used for verification and is completely detached from any other form of identification. Honestly I’m getting kinda sick of rumors of Russian and Chinese trolls, true or not, as well as AI commenters influencing genuine discourse.

Be called out for saying something controversial best I can tell, the term I think originated on Twitter to refer to a comment getting a lot more retweets than likes.

I’m pretty sure that exists and is just called unlisted, or if you only want them to be available to yourself private.

The rule could create some perverse incentives, such as discouraging some startup founders from taking their companies public.

Honestly good, companies going public creates perverse incentives for those companies to screw over their customers and the economy at large out of a drive for quarterly gains.

I agree that doing this and nothing else isn’t enough, but it will help and there isn’t any other one thing that would solve the problem either. Problems like this require a wide array of answers each of which only help a little but taken together are the solution.

Isn’t that because Microsoft either pays system integrators to only install Windows or threatens that they will stop providing relatively cheap Windows keys if they provide the option to start with Linux? I could have sworn I’d heard that somewhere.

So just because this one thing won’t solve the problem on its own we shouldn’t do it. More housing, and especially more affordable housing will help by virtue of creating more supply, and the alternative is building less new housing which has the exact same problem as what you bring up with building more. On top of that corporations and landlords and Airbnb “investors” don’t purchase all the housing that is available right now, so even if the rate at which that occurred stayed the same in absolute terms this would mean a lot more housing becoming available to actual residents.

That’s not the kind of data they’re looking for, if you post it somewhere publicly available they already have that without a warrant or anything. The kind of data to be worried about is the kind that those companies collect about where you travel and when, and what kind of people you talk to through email or private messages. Even if you don’t think there’s anything incriminating in there, law enforcement loves to collect evidence that they think can be used to pin any crime on anybody, even if they don’t know what that crime is exactly.

Reading the article does make it sound like it’s either that, or having google allow other app stores to be downloaded via the play store and give them the same level of access to other apps that the play store gets, I assume for things like automatic updates.

For the record, if you want to change the fact that the US president is not elected by popular vote, depending on your state there’s an initiative called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact), where a bunch of states are setting up trigger laws so that when enough states with enough electoral college votes have signed it into law, each of those states will vote for the candidate who won the popular vote.

I mean, that’s kinda exactly what I said, Apple taking a 30% cut of any transaction that occurs on their devices/on apps downloaded from their store makes no sense, though I will add that Patreon takes a 8 - 12% cut depending on how much support they give the creator. As far as Steam goes, to my knowledge they don’t take a cut out of in game purchases, only purchases that occur strictly on their platform. (Also I don’t think they charge everyone the 30%)

30% is a reasonably cut for transactions that take place in your store, the main complaint I see about Apple and their store and the cut they take is that they want 30% of any money that goes through any of their devices at all, not just their app store. Relevant here, they are charging the 30% fee for people’s memberships to creators on the platform, a process that is wholly separate from Apple’s ecosystem unless the user is using apple pay to pay for it.

Wait really, they’re adding Red Rescue Team!? Didn’t Nintendo just release the remake of that game recently.

Oh no, it was four years ago, it feels like it was more recent than that.