throwaways885

Okay, you first.

Being less facetious, we can grow the economy while reducing the resources we require with the right incentives in place.

Steam does natively integrate with cloud gaming, they just don't want to run a service: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/cloudgaming

What's the alternative? Run Stadia on Windows?

Imagine the outrage if your ISP told you the fee was going up to pay for Murdoch's propaganda machine.

'Australian concentration camps'?

It would be less of an issue if there was an actual free market, instead all unis just max out the student loan and still complain there's not enough money. I'd happily go to a shack if there's good teaching.

The US are even more innovative in ripping off students.

Half the planet are using Facebook. Does that not warrant special rules around how they can exclude people?

I'm also going to argue that individual choice is redundant here due to network effects.

Reality is truly a comedy. One day teachers will be a thing of the past in universities.

The universities should cut their losses then, and tell students to go somewhere else. Part of the issue is placating every whim of students, focusing on the fluff and not on the teaching.

"Limited"? UK tuition used to be much, much cheaper:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kin...

Rossmann is hardly rich. His whole brand is fighting Apple for right-to-repair legislation as well as a bunch of pro small business stuff. What exactly is wrong with this opinion on the oppressive covid lockdowns?

If I can go out safely and I know I & others are respecting the rules, theres zero chance of me staying at home.

Lens compression was absolutely making the general public look irresponsible.

Does that still hold when this platform has 3 billion users?

Most people don't mind because it's not their politics being censored.

Ask your employer to pay for it.

Nothing wrong with that as long as the climate improves.

Yes I'm referring to the deplatforming that's been going on for several years now. Things really ramped up in 2018 or so.

Anonymity is what gives LGBTQ+ groups the space to be themselves with fundamentalist Christian parents.

Anonymity is what gives foreign journalists the freedom to leak content their governments would execute them for.

Anonymity protects marginalised groups and it is essential to protecting democracy and freedom.

There is no false equivalency. Deplatforming is wrong, left or right, rich or poor. Disenfranchised people not having a voice is a cause of radicalisation and violence. If you don't believe me then talk to the Black community in America.

I defended Parler in another thread and I'll defend the SWP here, despite not particularly liking either group.

This is how the right has been feeling for a while. This is nothing new behaviour-wise for Facebook, the only difference is this gets more favourable media attention.

In my experience this site still is a bastion of hardcore "free-speech-extremist" libertarians. More so than Twitter, that's for sure.

Now is as good a time as any. The fact is the media will always be looking for the next Parler because it prints a great clickbait headline like "radical alt-right underground social network {discovered/deplatformed}".

HN is not full of morons. I do agree with you that Parler is generally misrepresented, but there is plenty of dissenters here. Things aren't as unbalanced as you perceive.

> However, equally surprising to me, is the number of pro-big tech company HN people who are suddenly deeply concerned about unchecked corporate power. People who two weeks ago would claim that companies should drive out employees who disagree with them, now wish these companies were subject to the will of the people. You can't spend a lifetime fighting to reduce the power of the federal government and then be surprised at all that large corporations are the ones deciding our public policy.

I wouldn't say these are in conflict. The biggest reason I oppose political movement in SV corporations is because I believe they'd become even more censorious than they are now. Today's corporations are evil to make money and protect their brand, but I don't want tomorrow's corporations to be evil for a political ideology.

No, GP means, literally, who put the cage policy in place. It was not the Trump administration.

People are only cross about this because it's Trump.

What about Trump/Russia collusion?

They should've humoured them just to shut up the people saying those things then.

I think the partisanship is what's really driving people like this. The Trump/Russia stuff was investigated, why not investigate election fraud too?

My Android's work profile has reasonable isolation. AFAIK my employer can't see or erase anything personal.

Unfortunately teenager and adult hours are forced to be synchronised, so schools just cannot open later.

> I disagree that Linux compatibility back then was a non-issue. It was not. It was a serious problem that held Linux back as a platform and as a daily driver and we all hated it, and it feels very dismissive to say that it was just a tiny side effect or that it's irrelevant to the broader point. Flash was never cross-platform and it held back the entire web from being a universally accessible platform. And it only got fixed because developers were forced to use a runtime that supported Linux. That is the only reason that Linux browsers are usable today.

More succinctly, it's unhealthy for any company to 'own' the web. The standards process we have today is far better.