So they have discussed this exact thing previously. As well as why they didn't include a mechanical system to clean or blow off the panels. And it all comes down to weight: The weight and added complexity of any of these systems is greater than just making the solar panels bigger so that it takes longer for dust accumulation to put them out of commission.

The quote you're responding to literally says *want*. It made the distinction. To get everything they *wanted* they had to subscribe to both services.

You were in such a rush to shit on other people you didn't even read your own quote.

Interesting.

Personally I changed purchasing habits because of Amazon Prime's return guarantees. I became much more willing to take a risk on a product... And honestly I still don't make many returns, unless the product is literally defective or (in one case) they only sent one of the two welding foot protectors we ordered...

If free, guaranteed returns go away I imagine I'll go back to buying a lot less.

Man, I am sorry for how you've suffered. But thank you for sharing.

I don't know that it will be any help, but here's an article about the thing I was referring to, the 'Russian Flu' and its long-haulers: https://www.thelancet.com/arti...

Your last two sentences there are an eerie echo of the 1890s...

In the 1890s, a marked feature of the psychoses of influenza was a profound sense of dread accompanied by feelings of alienation, both from oneself and from others. Disembodiment or the mutiny of one's own facilities was a common description: "My powers of enduranceâ have been shaken by âoea recent attack of influenza and its consequences", wrote Speaker Peel to Henry Lucy in 1894.

COVID kills young people. But more importantly, COVID maims young people at a significantly higher rate than it kills them. And we don't know when, if ever, they get over the long-term symptoms. The medical history of similarly afflicted people after the 'Russian Flu' at the end of the 19th century doesn't bode well.

From a detached perspective: For society, kIlling young people might be less bad than permanently disabling them.

They have ownership of that particular NFT, in the same way that you can own a baseball card.

No, buddy. Either you're completely deluded or you really don't understand what you're saying. That baseball card I found in my old closet in my parents' house two weeks ago while visiting? I own that. It's a real, physical thing. I could sell it, I could keep it, I could set it on fire. My ownership of that card in no way requires a group of people to get together and collectively agree I own it. My access to that card only requires me to physically walk over and pick it up. If you were to try and take my baseball card, the law would punish you. None of that is true about NFTs.

With NFTs, the company can give up some ownership but allow resales (which most don't these days), which is another revenue base.

Except they don't. They might tell you they do, but they don't. Because when they shut down their servers, it's all gone. You don't own anything. You just have a receipt. Same as I do for my ships in Star Citizen. Which I can totally "sell" and transfer to another player. And my ships will be just as gone if CIG decides to shut down the servers or just ban me because they didn't appreciate my Chris Roberts/Elon Musk slashfic. You are deluding yourself by thinking any of this is different or real. You are being swindled, and you've swallowed the bait hook-line-and-sinker.

I would like a platform where we can talk about subjects, even controversial subjects, even subjects some find offensive.

You're free to make that platform. Literally no one is stopping you.

Right now it seems that there is a mainstream narrative that if questioned you're ridiculed and called names and if you make arguments good enough that people start thinking you may be right, your ideas, and maybe you, are deemed dangerous and your speech is shut down.

You're right, those in power have the legal rights to shut down dissenting opinions, and they do, especially when they make convincing arguments.

Except that's not what's happening, not in reality.

My argument is that if companies have legal protection (Section 230) that says that they are not publishers and the content isn't theirs, they're just the platform.

Except Section 230 doesn't make some sort of "publisher/not publisher" distinction and instead explicitly allows website owners to moderate user content as they see fit. That's kind of the whole point of the law. Without it their choices would be either to not allow user content or allow all user content completely without moderation, as anything else would be lawsuit fodder.

Any publically traded company has to answer TO the public.

What does that sentence even mean? No they don't. They answer to their shareholders. The 'public' can just not use their services if they're unhappy.

Corporate monopolies do not have a right to lock anybody out

I don't recall any discussion of monopolies.

If you are shrilling for wither at this point, you are simply shilling for corporate monopolies. You should probably disclose who's paying you to shill for scumbags.

This is rapidly becoming incoherent. Did you respond to the right person? Did you respond on the right article?

You know, I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I'll go ahead and bite.

Wanna know something funny? If you go back in my history in Slashdot--I mean, WAY back--you'll find I was a Bush conservative. I grew up 100% believing Reagan was God's gift to the country. My beliefs haven't really changed that much, to be honest. I don't consider myself a Conservative but if anyone could convince me to honestly discuss my beliefs they'd probably come out of the conversation convinced I am one.

And back in the 80s and 90s? That was what Conservatives said. "A private entity cannot engage in censorship." And we gave "LIberals" serious shit when they whined about big evil corporations "censoring" people.

Because they can't. Not by themselves. The only way they could get anywhere NEAR censorship is by using the courts to silence someone. And then they are still not the ones censoring someone, the GOVERNMENT is using ITS POWER to censor them at the behest of probably some corporate donor. And THAT is wrong. But that's not what we're talking about here.

What we're talking about is a PRIVATE BUSINESS making a decision about the clients it will serve. One of the (supposedly) most fundamental, CORE BELIEFS of the Conservative school of thought, going all the way back to Goldwater and even further, is the incredible importance of private property rights. Of freedom of association. Of the importance of a business to be able to operate in a free market as free as possible from government interference. Of the fact that incorporating doesn't make individuals give up their right to free speech. That if people don't like what a company is doing, they should vote with their feet and their dollars and take their business elsewhere. The market will decide.

It's why we believe things like an owner of a private bakery shouldn't be forced to bake a cake they don't want to.

But you fucking pathetic, weaselly, emasculated whiny ass fucks have gone and thrown all those CORE PRINCIPLES away because a private business doesn't want you as a fucking customer anymore because you're such degenerate assholes all the other customers can't stand you. BOO FUCKING HOO! GROW THE FUCK UP! STOP RUNNING TO THE NANNY STATE TO WIPE YOUR FUCKING ASS AND DO IT YOURSELF!

If your ideas are better, then prove it by convincing people. No private company owes you a platform. Either pay for it your fucking selves or fucking put on some clean clothes and go door to door if you have to.

But when no one but a bunch of violent racist assholes show up at your new website, or everyone slams the door in your face, who are you gonna blame then?

Ah but see, you've actually said something intelligent! Albeit accidentally, I'm sure. The government telling private entities what speech to allow and what speech to suppress ACTUALLY IS CENSORSHIP! Because it's the GOVERNMENT who is acting! Amazing!

Luckily the Federal Courts shut down Florida's attempt to do just that.

A private entity is incapable of censorship.

Bolsonaro can walk outside and talk into any press microphone that gets stuck in his face. He's not the least bit censored.

I came down with the flu around 2011 and it convinced me I'd never actually had the flu before in my entire life. I had never felt misery like that before. At the time due to an egg allergy I was not allowed to have flu vaccines (don't even start with "there's non-egg vaccines available", good luck finding one).
I took Tamiflu, the gold standard retroviral for flu. I had a mild psychotic episode. It was pretty scary. Looking into it, psychological problems are a known side-effect. They banned giving it to kids in Japan because they kept committing suicide. All this for an average reduction in length of symptoms by 24 hours. Taking that as a prophylactic is terrifying.
Meanwhile in recent years my egg allergy has become undetectable, so I've been cleared for the flu vaccine. Sore arm and fatigue for a day are all I've ever suffered from it. And, again, having looked into it I've never heard anything like "3 to 5 days of flu symptoms" from the vaccine.
I don't know where you're getting your info from, but it doesn't seem to match our current reality. Did Nelson Mandela die in prison in your world?

Stop apologizing for the same entities that are destroying your health and happiness in exchange for more profits.

How much profit, exactly, did Uber and Lyft make last year? How about in 2019?

It's amazing how fervently people repeat things, without ever wondering for a moment if they're true, because they fit their preconceived notions.

installing monitored ballot boxes on-premises

This theory about the post office box somehow being an intimidation tactic makes no sense. Amazon wanted workers to vote, because it wanted them to vote no. Amazon has no way to know whether sealed envelopes placed in the mailbox are Yes or No votes. As such, discouraging people from voting is 100% against their interests.

And the Union bitching about this makes no sense, as their official policy is they oppose secret ballots anyway! The RWDSU wants 'card check' for all elections, where you have to publicly state your vote, not turn in a secret ballot. How the fuck is giving someone an official post office box to put a secret ballot in intimidation but making someone say Yes/No in front of everyone NOT?