They do. Ironically a lot of users criticise particular group of people of users being in the grip of sky etc.
I know the word addiction isn’t quite right but YT is still a social media.
Cherry
I know right. The kinda events that they said this was to protect from rarely occur. When you look back they spruiked the word terror and extremist, over and over to get acceptance and now…well now almost everyone fits in that category if your language or moderate actions are not in flavour.
This is it. Don’t need apps. Don’t need overpriced crap food.
Seems like the bot is listening to conversations around here. Paywalled article.
Cruella de-ville wanted 99 puppies back in the day and no one saw issue with that till it came out why…books, puppies, if you love the product, not wanting them to be used nefariously and choosing to air that moralistic stance rather than just cash in tells you a lot. This lady should be applauded.
Yup, its an assault from many directions. Books have had a glut in the past and TBH most people were reluctant to pay for average chaffe, our second hand shops are a testament. I personally love print, the smell the feel, the knowing the processes involved involved, I feel the same about other media. I will argue all day long recent digital has harmed these. I know some champion digital art, id argue if its so readily available is no longer desirable…but that is a whole other argument.
I think for me its a matter of preserving the ideas. Why are they doing this? traditionally the idea of burning book was to stop the spread of ideas. In terms of revolution (renaissance, enlightenment, then industrial) each new one has information to flow free-er and ideas have grown So whats the aim here for burning? is it to sell the info, is it to repress ideas? i think identifying that will allow better preservation and resistance.
It’s about intending the info. She should release the booklist so alternative digital can be collected and protected.
Honestly these guys are the worst nerds. They still trying to be cool. Whats the thing with Americans and rich people wanting to be a mafia boss?
They produced it…offering their product as a solution to the conformity being imposed. They are now. who they warned us against
Its the shift of tone that bothers me, for years it was ‘we would never infringe’ we all suspected they may. Suddenly they are not only saying they will do it, they are even telling us its a service we should pay for. The amount of people on board with this scares me.
I paid for the line…not the phone. I always buy second hand handsets.
The irony is no one even calls me anymore. I miss when it was a nokia and only used to speak to someone on the go.
Interesting they are saying this outloud…its almost like they are trying a strategy of determinism.
They can go F themselves, they need to be reminded of what happens to when authority tries conformity <iframe src="https://archive.org/embed/1983-30sec” width="560” height="384” frameborder="0” webkitallowfullscreen="true” mozallowfullscreen="true” allowfullscreen></iframe>
I think you will find that systems of ownership and being reduced or removed and systems of leasing or renting are being pushed. So its becoming less of an option…surprising to the benefit of the rich…not the user paying
Faff around with the language and message all you like, but rent/lease/asa a service etc are all being touted against a ’option’ at a time where we are seeing destruction of ownership. This is not good for the average person and I am always surprised by the amount of people who are happy to take this or bootlick on the matter.
I think the discrepancy here is if leasing devices at which I is agree fair.
What I take umbridge with is the way ownership is being removed, for something that we know can be produced plentifully. And the push to give everything as a service or lease.
As a sociaty We are allowing tiered privileges.