Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T
Posts
6
Comments
255
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • If you read any of his memoirs or interviews, you'd know that his intended destination was Ecuador, and he couldn't fly out of Russia due to his passport being revoked. He lived in the Russian airport until he was granted asylum, so it's not like he had much choice.

    I didn't see any sources that went against those claims except from WikiLeaks, so I don't see much of a reason to discredit them.

  • Surprised how nobody mentioned "Everytime We Touch" by Cascada

  • Not OP, but the tools provided by my OEM of choice are already really good, so it's something I'm glad exists but isn't useful to me.

  • I don't know; AFAIK, Reddit successfully argued that they own Wallstreetbets' trademarks in court. That might void all of these licenses depending on the ToS of the instance being used.

  • When using the right tools, phones are already incredibly powerful in an educational environment. There's a reason why Kahoot achieved meme status: it's because students love it.

  • Reminds me of Rensenware.

  • As an American, it's really sad to see the EU fall into this trap.

  • None of the other comments explain why misinformation makes money.

    It's because stuff like misinformation, lies by omission, and rage bait all tend to incite very emotional responses in people. These people then engage with the post via likes, retweets, viewership, dislikes etc. that tell the algorithm to increase said post's reach to more people. Platforms want to consume as much of people's time as possible for monetization purposes, so misinformation really helps them.

    That being said, all of this is pure speculation. If I were to guess why they disbanded their T&S team strictly from the headline, it would be because of incompetence.

  • I agree with you on the first 3. I can see why someone would disagree with #1, but the middle 2 are definitely very onion-y. They're pretty similar to the "Putin wins 112% of the vote" headline on The Onion's YouTube channel.

  • Reasonable control in the legal sense does matter though. Right now, a majority of creatives don't own their IP in the legal sense, and they can't stop large companies from milking their works dry as a result. In the absence of IP laws, creatives would be able to create their works, but they'd also be competing against companies that have the resources to monetize, influence the general public, and kill the franchise through poor choices.

    It's really important to know that the vast majority of people aren't going to have the goodwill to tip or otherwise support free works, and it's even less likely if a large company does enough marketing to overshadow an artist.

  • It very much is still a problem. It's unrealistic to expect the majority of YT users to use a tool like SponsorBlock.

  • I already understand the point of the video. I'm saying that the point of the video doesn't reflect the wishes and wills of all artists. If someone pours their heart and soul into something, they should have reasonable control over how that something is used by other people. The last thing we want is to demotivate those artists from making great works.

  • I don't agree with that video, and I'm sure that a good chunk of talented creators wouldn't appreciate losing control of their own works. Copyright needs to be rewritten, but abolished is quite a huge overcorrection

  • Why would Apple make a tool for Xiaomi phones?

  • A bit late, but the police are often paid by captors, so calling the police just leads to punishment.

  • Purely speculating, but it sounds like he's clinically depressed, and weight gain is often a byproduct of depression. Depression is considered a disability at the federal level, so he's potentially part of a protected class.

    I personally don't buy the "he's big and tall and it's distracting" argument. From what I can tell, this wasn't part of a film set or the like; it's just a normal party. Since he's a server, what about his appearance is stopping him from doing his job? If appearance matters so much, what's stopping his employer for providing a new outfit? Companies are legally required to provide accommodations in this case if the server has a disability, which might be the case.

    From the few excerpts I've read, this just seems like a few judgemental execs didn't want someone to get paid because of his weight, and I have 0 sympathy for that BS. The only other take I've seen is that due to space constraints, having him would be an occupational hazard, which is fair.

  • If you ignore the reasons why someone might eat too many calories relative to what their specific body needs, then yes.

  • Weight is often something that people can't control. There are many reasons why someone can be overweight or obese.