That’s fine. I will either continue to use adblockers, pay, or stop using the internet outside of what is required to function in society. I already refuse to use anything that has decided to go ad supported without the ability to block ads and has a price I’m not willing to pay.
If small (or large) businesses require the mass collection of personal information by malicious advertisers to exist, then they don’t derserve to exist.
Yes, OP said all advertising. You mentioned the main problems with ditching all advertising. I added to the conversation with a poasible middle ground that addressed the worst parts.
Targeted advertising, which requires collecting personal information without people’s knowledge, is what makes online advertising the absolute worst kind of advertising. That could be addressed on a way that could allow other less malicious forms to exist.
Any change just for the sake of change will be detrimental to the functionality. Constant change means there is never a point in time where the overall functionality can be reviewed for stability.
I give him 50/50 odds on dropping a N-bomb.
They want to be angry.
A swiping motion and muscle memory for tapping are two different things. It took a while to get fast with my thumbs even though I type fairly fast on a keyboard.
Even educated people are vulnerable to misinformation on topics for which they are not experts, and propaganda is a numbers game. Socialism is a better scaling economic system because it basically creates a lot of small communities (workers who own the company). Democracy scales better than anarchy because it creates a system for the decision making of anarchy that wouldn’t be possible for more than a few hundred people. Both also have downsides, but handle scaling issues better than the other options.
They won’t be able to provide any larger than a few hundred people because those systems are extremely vulnerable to malicious actors.
Communism and anarchy work for small groups where people know and trust each other and are able to compromise.
What hacking is involved in relation to an op-in feature?
Ok, traitor.
It is a new level of a news organization directly acknowledging how much word salad he spews instead of treating it as normal.
I agree completely, just wanted to make sure it was clear that he has been convicted.
Just an excuse to avoid actually holding him accountable for anything.
Putting his ass in jail might harden his base but turn off those who were only party loyal out of tradition and might throw away their vote to a 3rd party. Hell, it might motivate more people to overcome voter suppression and vote for Dems if the system actually does something to hold him accountable. Increased turnout is more important than how hard conservatives mash the Trump button.
While I love the detail and clarity of your posts, it is getting depressing seeing just how little actual progress has been made on holding him accountable.
Keep up the good work so if anything actually happens we will have a reminder that there was something.
But if we never get him convicted of any crimes, it won’t matter very much.
Texhnicslly, if we never see him sentenced for his convictions it won’t matter. He has 34 convictions.
Boaty McBoatface was the rated G version, and didn’t have thr novelty of the Dew campaign. It is probably a close second.
Dub the Dew was just lightning in a bottle (or maybe a can).
The news loves to focus on individual Israeli hostages and victims by providing backgrounds and what they do for a living, but for the most part just lists Palestinian deaths by numbers and only occasionally includes names or family relationships.
There is one news agency, I think the BBC, which used the phrase “unprecedented attack” to refer to the Oct atrocity that kicked off the current hostilities but doesn’t use any similar phrasing for the IDF killing many times more civilians as a response. So apparently genocide doesn’t need called out in a similar fashion because it is apparently not unprecedented.
No, he fails every time but his base pretends he wins and the news has such low expectations and a need to sell advertising for profit so they go along with it.