Beliefs are the problem if they form the basis of the actions of people.
How many wars have been started, people have been killed with the perpetrators shouting the equivalent of 'my deity is the best'?
Now compare that to the ones where the perpetrators shouted 'there are no gods'.

Also: you do not need religion to teach empathy and compassion. At all.
I don't really trust empathy and compassion when that somehow stems from a fear of retaliation from a deity, or from the promise of a reward in some afterlife.

Left wing? Hmm. From where I am standing (NL, Europa) you have two political parties. Both are right wing, albeit one more than the other. Both tend to the plebs due to your strange 'winner takes all' voting mechanisms.

China has only one political party. The US has -for all practical purposes- only two. While that is slightly better, it still leads to very suboptimal situations. There is too little feedback in the system. As a voter, what can you do when your choice is between a giant douche an a turd sandwich?

This is not a 'left-or-right' issue, it is a 'stupid-vs-intelligent' issue. The whole 'left-vs-right' is nonsensical in the US. You have two political parties doing stupid stuff. The duopoly guarantees lack of meaningful feedback. I suggest focussing on fixing the duopoly instead of which party shows which stupidity.

You do not understand others buying the Apple stuff, so they must be fanatics. Totally nothing to do with you understanding that your needs differ from the needs of others. Nope. They are crazy. Yup. That's it.

And also, after the iPhone introduction no Apple product failed because of those fanbois. Nope. No failures. Move along.

I marvel at the mental gymnastics required to -in the same post- reconcile the idea that Apple fanboys will buy 'anything with an Apple logo slapped on it' with the fun fact of Apple products actually failing in the market.

"He has no reason to criticize Vision Pro. There is nothing beneficial to Netflix by criticizing Apple."

Ah, but 'he' != 'netflix'. For Netflix it may not be beneficial. But a CEO is the big guy/gal on the top of the rock. The alpha (fe)male! It may feel as a benefit for an overblown ego to push others down. Remember how Steve Ballmer laughed at the iPhone, stating it did not appeal to business customers? Same thing. Overblown ego combined with the inability to see what the future may bring, and then mitigate feelings of uncertainty by laughing at some competitor to make oneself feel better. Scott McNealy, idem.

But I think in the basis we agree: this should not be CEO-like behaviour, since it is not beneficial to the company at large.

We live in a post-HHGTG UNIVERSE. If only Douglas Adams were still alive to see that marketing reality has become more absurd than âoeYour Plastic Pal Whoâ(TM)s Fun To Be Withââ¦

Or worse. The link you paid for pointed to a domain that was not renewed. So someone else bought the domain while it was up for grabs.

Your link now points to a picture putting the original goatse.cx to shame. Advertising that you are the 'one and only true owner' of the link may now actually be detrimental to you...

The only way I can picture 'Goldman Sachs' and 'world-class' reputation in one sentence, is by adding a negation to that sentence.

I suspect they are in the same class as the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.

So what if we measure the length of the interval by the difference in sound intensity? Then going from high to low could provide a 'point in time', the same as going from low to high. And if we reference on these points in time, instead of what is between them, we could still experience silence as something else than sound, but experience the same length for sound as well as non-sound.

Some background: a drummer does not change tempo when only playing short sounds with silence in between compared to sounds that have a lot of sustain: a drummer will play rimshots in the same speed as cymbal hits.

Well, as a matter of fact it is quite easy to get close enough to a native Dutch pronunciation.

visdeurbel: that is the same v as in vision and venom
visdeurbel: almost like is, but shorter like in business
visdeurbel: like the d in door and daft
visdeurbel: a bit like Europe, but without the j-sound at the start; keep the r-sound short
visdeurbel: like bell, but with a short sounding l.

Ehhm, no. Losing say $25 per unit instead of $50 per unit is still a loss.

Not to forget the fragility of the solution: these mirrors can become a military target far too easily. And the other way around is also troubling. Align the mirrors to irradiate a smaller target area et voila: fried enemies.

So indeed, bad idea on multiple grounds.

Somehow your post is now +3, Funny, but if I had mod points I would certainly go for 'Insightful'.

I have not used a linux desktop for quite some time, but judging from gp and from your post, things do not look good.

The question is not why anybody should 'want the same option for digital works', because that option is actually created out of necessity: with for instance a painting there is only one instance. So having ownership of that one instance is actually quite a thing. You have it, and nobody else has it. So you _need_ ownership here to handle the economic scarcity of that one painting.

With digital artwork every instance or copy is indistinguishable from all of its siblings. Which means that there is no scarcity, which means that economic constructs like 'ownership' are not needed.

What it basically boils down to, is that with NFTs you artificially create scarcity for something that is not scarce at all.

And if 'bragging rights' are all that important, just become a patron to an artist and give that artist money. No blockchain needed to do that.