How about instead of celebrating the thing that mildly irritates you becoming a felony crime, you don't watch those shitty videos? There are tons of videos covering video games, movies, and music that just can't exist without the audio.

Christ, what's next, banning the sale of speakers that go over a certain decibel level because someone else might hear the music you're listening to?

First of all, making a civil matter a felony is insane.

Secondly, if we're going this route could you make falsly reporting copyright infringement a felony as well?

She wasn't "scalded". Her skin melted into her pants and required medical attention.

Apple isn't refusing warranty for taking you phone diving. They're refusing warranty for any exposure to water, while at the same time showing their phones being submerged in water and telling customers that it'll be fine.

You'd either have an apartment complex relying on a specific company's success to keep full, or the company itself would run it placing thier workers under the corporate thumb 24/7 and risking one entity able to take both their income and housing away.

Is it bulk collection though? Does the extension actively access things or does it just look at what Facebook sends the user?

So I guess all the safety timelines for vacine trials were just in place for show all this time. I'm sure I'll feel much better about mass rollout of a hastily tested vaccine because of this. Surely nothing bad has ever happened because of pushing an ill-tested vaccine on the public...

Oh wait, it has. Hurray longterm negative side effects. I said back in March that this would happen. Anything to get a vaccine out before the election, 18 month testing be damned. And of course we're supposed to be greatful of this risk to public health being used to hastily cover up the existing risk to public health caused by our own government being more worried about poll numbers than death numbers.

Fuck that.

For hiring rates, sure. People can avoid the job if it isn't offering enough, and that's all well and good.

This is pay cuts for existing employees. To use your example, you don't pay for a service in London then demand a refund because you found it cheaper in Banjul. You agreed to the price up front.

They aren't saying coming in to the office is worth 10% of your salary, though. If you work from home but stay in the city you'll see no change in pay.

I was comparing downloaded and physical copies as pertains to consoles (there are no drm free options there) and Steam, which the post I replied to was comparing.

Wait...did you compare renting games and losing them the instant you stop paying to buying them on a platform where I still have access to games I bought 15 years ago that's never charged me fee outside of game purchases?

I'm sorry, it's too early for polite discourse on the internet. Disregard my other post, there's no point feeding such an obvious troll.

Digital games are worth far less than physical copies to me. Between the occasional ridiculously good sale and Humble Bundle I can pick up a lot of decent content for a few bucks. My Steam account is also 15 years old and I've never had to repurchase a game because I got a new PC. I've never had my account threatened to be locked because someone didn't like something I said. I've never had to pay a fee to use online functionality in my games.

On paper I understand that Steam looks very similar. In practice Steam offers me a lot more per dollar spent. I still buy direct when I specifically want to support a game, but more often than not physical copies dont exist for newer small developer games, so it only becomes a question of who to buy from.

You want me to spend $300 a year to rent games? If that's to be the new norm, that comes out to $2,000 over a 5 year span, including the console, at the end of which you own only a console with no games. You'll get back about $200 selling it.

I move to new generations of consoles by selling the last gen. You can get a lot more money for a console plus games, especially around the holidays. Don't fall for the trap of digital everything. Physical copies unless unable, and even then seriously consider passing before committing to a non transferable digital copy.

In your examples the venue is saying no because they dont want to support the message.

In the application of this the venue would be saying no because they'd have to provide legal defense. Small venues couldn't afford all the legal battles and big ones would pick and choose. The result would be big money dictating what fringe ideas should be shared, and anyone that disagrees would be unable to start thier own platform.

There's more nuance than that, but that's what this would enable.

It's not that all advertising is ineffective, it's that for companies with such massive market share that have been household names for decades the saturation point for advertising dollars is way lower.

There are diminishing returns on advertising. At some point dollars spent on advertising surpass dollars made from that advertising. Finding the sweet spot is the goal, but it's constantly shifting.

And insufferable cunts with attitude like this is why a lot of shit jobs are shit jobs. Easiest work there is, still gonna fuck it up.