I’ll spare you the troubles.
I’ll spare you the troubles.
It’s OK. I also used to use the N word. I didn’t call anyone it, I just used it. It wasn’t racist, I don’t use the word anymore, but I never called anyone that.
/s
But if it doesn’t disrupt it isn’t worth it!
/s
Here, not only did he admit he used to call people the R word, which, nice of him to not do that anymore, but so uncool to have done it in the first place. He also didn’t knew that Hard R refers to a racist slur. Which tells you the kind of background and mind space he comes from. Again, good of him to want to do better, but he has a lot to of catch up to do.
You have watched his videos, he is not the brightest bulb in the shed. Even on technical topics he sometimes spouts really awful things. Remember when he accidentally made racists remarks because he got confused about the meaning of the words he was using?
This has been argued in courts ad nauseum. It is not piracy. Just downloading is not piracy. If you download a ROM from a site, the site is guilty of piracy. You are not. If you download from a torrent though, you’re guilty because you’re also participating in the distribution. There’s also nuance with profit depending on the jurisdiction. But, just like throwing away a pamphlet is not piracy, refusing to download and ad is not piracy.
Friendly reminder that pirates didn’t usually stole gold. Piracy was stealing shipping goods, then selling them for profit at some port. Digital piracy is thus defined as acquiring, and then distributing for profit, media that you don’t own the copyrights of. Ad blocking is categorically not piracy.
Piracy is distributing media you don’t own. How does blocking ads equates with acquisition and distribution of media you don’t own? It doesn’t.
Evading advertisement is not piracy.
Nope, you’re not taking anything away from the advertiser. They are free to display but they’re not entitled to being watched. You don’t get penalized for ignoring or closing your eyes during trailers at the cinema. But that is exactly what arguing against ad blockers is. The entitlement of advertisers to your attention. This fundamentally breaks the social contract of ads. Imagine corporations arguing that municipal anti-billboard laws are theft
He directly called it bad because it hurt his revenue stream. He is ok with ad blocking as long as it isn’t being done to him. That’s pretty bold if you ask me. A double standard, quite the opposite of nuance. He equated it with entering a cirque due soleil show without paying a ticket, which is a false equivalence. He thinks that he is entitled to have his ads seen as a price of admittance to watching his videos. No one is entitled to have their ads watched.
This is just a pile of garbage. Jim Sterling’s break down is the most complete argument. But this is just a plain ol bag of shit.
You think that billionaires don’t do that? Have you heard of Harvey Epstein? Who do you think the biggest customers of child trafficking and sex slaves are?
That’s an extremely naïve view of the world. If Musk could sit the chair, he would. What do you think the accumulation of unhinged amounts of wealth is about but increased power? What do you think those opulent displays of wealth from dictators is about but to flaunt that they have all the wealth and power?
Have you heard about this corporation called the church of Latter Day Saints?
Oh honey, do you really ignore that a huge chunk of dictatorships do it for the money and most are already billionaires? Why exactly do you think Musk supports the orange cheeto?
As someone who learned English as a second language. Yes, that pronunciation exists, I’ve heard it used on films. I don’t know if it is a formally defined or linguistically studied thing. But I can hear the different ways the exact same word is vocalized wildly different by different native English speakers. And they always claim theirs is the only correct way of saying it, even though they still somehow understood what was said.
That always reeks of so much insecurity to me. Just own up to it. If you are in a relationship, “sure, I would do a threesome, but only if you actively want it too and we both agreed on the person and what was allowed or forbidden”. Not in a relationship, “Sure, I would be down for a threesome as long as the desires and limits of all people involved are discussed before hand and accepted by all”. There, with that attitude there’s less risk of confusion or misunderstanding.
My pet conspiracy theory is that he already wrote the books. But the failure of the last season of the series was so horrendous he decided to never publish them and we will probably only hear of them when they’re published posthumously.
Under law, there’s no such a thing as ‘war’, there are armed conflicts. It is also incorrect that armed conflicts can only happen between states, there are international, non-international conflicts and there are other situations of armed violence. And there are different level of international and human rights law that apply different depending on the type of conflict. There’s also parts of tne resolutions that state that it doesn’t matter what you call them, they’re still POW and you still have to treat them as such. The real problem is that the US hasn’t ratified any of those resolutions and conventions because they fear having any diplomatic oversight, the US has committed so many war crimes that it would take decades of research just to sort out the last half of the 20th century.
Finally, even if international humanitarian law doesn’t apply, then international human rights law still does. But the US plays with rules based international order as their toy because they have the biggest guns and it is hard to front them. And before any of the what abouters comes here to reply, Russia and China are just as bad. No international neocolonialist empire is free of human rights violations.
I also noticed that they started showing ads upon opening YouTube on Android TV.
Google sucks so bad.