Saw a clip of someone from Idaho as I recall, explaining that his raise was $1.15 total.
85 karma · joined March 4, 2020
"selling out" -> ironically embracing brands -> unironically embracing brands
And then, my view:
I used to hold on to this idea of authenticity tightly. Everything I saw I was suspicious of. "Who is paying you to say that? Is this an endorsement? What ideology comes with this message? Who would benefit from me believing this?" But the volume of messages is too vast, and at some point I accept myself under someone's "illusion". Who cares? We (as a society) have moved past the question of commodity fetishism; complaining about it is no longer critique, it's just annoying. "--Yes. And?" We've been writing about the collapse of the "sacred" since at least the 80s.
Now talk about it to yourself as if you're the expert professor person lecturing.
In more frustrated moments everyone thinks "if {politician} would just disappear it would be so convenient for everyone else" then gets uncomfortable at the implications. Which they should, because that's the seed of murder and chaos, but nonetheless they do.
Lots of music. Has vast library going back 15 years now. Creators can be supported (although the incentives are to make ad-friendly content, which usually disappoints) via Patreon (to incentivize content that isn't as ad-friendly).
Some will feign that people will want to deal with hosting video, decentralized, at scale. They won't. Only nerds will; you and me. Nobody else cares because it's slow and less convenient (not even throwing shade, that's just a good product). Plus less and less people can afford housing so that's less people affording PCs for their housing/hosting (nobody is going to host from their laptop on coffee wifi). We can be upset about that, or we can just accept it.
I do not understand why this is something that must be proven.
> It's obvious that there are very few women that can compete successfully in a genderless athletic arena.
Respectfully, is it? Or do we assume this to be the case?
Makes sense then that software among other things becomes a service.
Problem is same old conflict: I work for money, they own my work and take money, I resent that, they like it, then violence or legislation or something.
trans men (female-to-male)[1] trans women (male-to-female)[2]
[1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/trans-man [2] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/trans-woman
> I think what OP means is that if a lesbian declines sex with a trans women (male-to-female) on the basis of the latter's assigned gender at birth (male), the former is marked as a transphobe.
Nobody suggested this. {Parent} was merely pointing out one advantage of CRT tech over LCD tech in a specific use case.
Consumers are mercenary, as are companies, and that’s the rational way to be in an economy of scale, where loyalty is “brand loyalty”. If consumers aren’t loyal, it’s a failure of the company’s marketing.
"GramError: Don't spend too much time thinking about where to put your commas."
"TeachError: Did you read the instructions?"
"HistError: <on this day history fact>"
"Kerror: I'd like to speak to the sysadmin."
"NetError: HSOCK_WIND_ERR_NO_BIND_4_6() expects to be understood."
"TsundError: It's not like this means anything, idiot."
Exactly. We should let the market decide what the best product is.
I don’t work to have fun, I work to have a paycheck. Don’t insult me by pretending the deal is anything more.