I read somewhere that Hezbollah started using pagers as their main method of communication instead of cell phones out of worry that phones would get hacked. That’d explain the prevalence of the pagers.
I read somewhere that Hezbollah started using pagers as their main method of communication instead of cell phones out of worry that phones would get hacked. That’d explain the prevalence of the pagers.
I think the point of the island is to show that when you have limited space, residential density really matters. Even if you took away all the concrete, spacing, etc between houses in this example and just out 100 ranch style homes in a corner with no spacing in between them, it would leave room for significantly less nature.
Your neighborhood sounds beautiful, and that’s great, but that ratio between nature and residents is probably being achieved with more land than if high density residential housing was in place.
deleted by creator
The spicy potato tacos are my sleeper taco bell hit.
I did recently have the Baja blast gelato and it was super disappointing - basically a diluted slushie that’s frozen, no gelato/sorbet texture at all.
The sauce is 10/10
deleted by creator
You are citing a statement, and it is a fact that the statement was said, but the content of that statement is not a fact because there’s very little evidence to support it being a fact. Lies exist, especially from the election meddling, ex KGB foreign adversary national leader types.
There’s a big difference between citing facts and citing a statement. You likely have no evidence that the statement is a fact, besides taking the ex-kgb leader of an adversarial nations word at face value, which…does sound a little silly when you say it out loud like that, doesn’t it? Keep in mind this nation has definitely messed with our elections in the past too lol.
deleted by creator
The question was why do we need to accept that politicians will disappoint you, implying that they had something they believed would not disappoint them.
I thought it was a third party candidate.
Apparently it was anarchism.
Rookie Lemmy mistake.
And still refuse to address the core issue, which is the lack of moderation and policing of content creating the essential need for adblockers in the first place.
You are voluntarily consuming content that the content creators agreed to have the ads for. You can just not consume that content.
Why won’t they think of the content creators?
For the upteenth time, they probably are thinking of them because the content creators agreed to have them as a revenue stream.
You’re acting like content creators are completely removed from this. guess who pays them? generally speaking, not you. It’s the big bad ad companies. Why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT.
Especially in a world where far better alternatives (like merch and patreon type sites) exists to give them money, directly, without having to deal with advertising hellscapes.
Great! Consume your content from those places! I’m in the patreons for a few podcasts myself for the ad-free versions.
Be smart, use an ad blocker for your sanity, but at least acknowledge that you are likely at least a tiny bit cutting into a revenue stream that the creators utilize. Again, no guilt trip here, I’ve ran pi hole instances myself. In fact some folks definitely encourage their base to use ad blockers on their content, I believe Louis Rossman is one of them. But I don’t delude myself into thinking this is their fault. That is truly some “LOOK AT WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!” reasoning.
After all of this, do you see why it can be comparable to piracy? Because content creators agreed to have it as part of their revenue stream to be served alongside the content, so having it blocked cuts into that revenue stream.
I’m not asking you to change behaviors. It just feels like I’m talking to a wall. Do you disagree with anything the previous paragraph?
After all of this, do you see why it can be comparable to piracy? Because content creators agreed to have it as part of their revenue stream to be served alongside the content, so having it blocked cuts into that revenue stream.
EDIT: so optimistically, it takes two parties to have poor communication. So I’m going to try and clear things up.
I am NOT arguing that users have to be subjected to ads.
I am arguing that content providers serve ads as a revenue stream, and blocking that cuts into that revenue stream. Boo hoo, I’ll do it anyways and probably support them in other ways, like subscribing to them, buying their merch, sharing their articles or songs, etc.
But I’m saying I understand why, from a content provider/creators standpoint, being deprived of that revenue stream that I intended to be served alongside my content, is comparable to piracy. Because as the content creator I agreed to financially benefit from ads being served alongside my content, and instead content is being consumed without that financial kickback.
Being able to imagine alternatives doesn’t mean they’re realistic.
How realistic do you think this is?
In what world will a politician never disappoint you?
I’m generally in full control of myself and even I disappoint myself - fringe third party candidates are not the political messiah some people think they are.
You’re missing my point - the creators of the content you voluntarily consume have an agreement with advertising companies, under which they get financial compensation when people view the ads.
Therefore, when you use an ad blocker, you are depriving them of that expected financial compensation.
This is why it can be comparable to piracy. You are voluntarily consuming content while depriving the content creators of an intended revenue stream.
Do you have any criticism against that line of reasoning, or are you just going to try and criticize me instead?
Do you agree that “What the advertising companies have done” was in agreement with the providers of the content you’re consuming?
Meaning, the providers of the content you’re consuming intended for the advertising to be a revenue stream?
Meaning it’s not “the big bad advertisers” - it’s really the providers of the content you’re voluntarily consuming who you’re trying to frame as the bad guys?
You…really don’t have to.
Again, I’m all for ad blockers, I use Firefox, I’ve ran my own pihole instance, etc.
I’m just going to be frank, you’re being a little melodramatic. Do you just get vaporized when you use someone else’s computer and an ad blocker isn’t installed? Likely not.
Ironically, by framing what is just a quality of life thing as a mandatory reaction to content providers actions, it sounds like you’re the one trying to shift blame onto them. Your entire argument has very strong “LOOK AT WHAT YOU MADE ME DO” energy.
All I’m saying is call a spade a spade. I acknowledge that by using an ad blocker, I’m economically negatively affecting the content provider. I’m okay with that. On some websites I’ll disable the ad blocker, if it’s one I use a lot with reasonable constraints.
To tack onto your list, ad blocking also deprives a source from an intended revenue stream associated with the content, which is probably why it’s being compared to piracy.
I’m all on board with ad blockers, let’s just at least acknowledge the economic reality surrounding their use.
Yeah GoT just… evaporated. People don’t even really talk about how bad it is anymore.
This is only one small piece of the puzzle, but it’s fairly common to have trouble finding a place to rent if you’re a foreigner, specifically because you’re a foreigner.