I mean I do agree with the general gist that moving to the fediverse is the only way to save the internet control. That being said I don't know of any of them hitting real long term major usage against the big guys like google. IE peer tube I see working in the hosting content for fun... but I can't see it being a succesful platform for creators to generate revenue. Myspace/facebook I find a bad example... fact is the reality is the biggest reason facebook moved on and myspace died... is facebook was quicker to adopt privacy invasions and applied that to generating revenue, which gave them the marketing budget.

Worth saying.... a coder isn't what's needed to make a successful social media site right now anyway. In order it's connections and ability to get people to join and to get a positive view in the public eye. Money helps with that, timing, connections etc.. Now yeah this woman probably doesn't have that either, but getting a social media site running in 2023, working code is the easiest thing to get, be it using one of the dozens of working open source frameworks, to hiring a coder.

Lets face it if someone off the street approached me and told me he was about to start the next big social media site... "hows your code" would be probably question 15 on my list of skeptical questions... way behind "how do you expect to reach the critical mass necessary to make a worthwhile social media site

One party that consistantly raises the debt when they are in. Namely due to cutting taxes on those who could easily afford to pay them.

I think the gist is, as time goes on, the world is turning into a company town. The fear is these big companies start enabling the same shoddy practices at the same time. The barrier to entry is insurmountable for a new contender, and the old contenders have all been starved out, and no one without 50 billion to gamble on a 1 in 100 shot has a chance of making a new big tech company, top it off if you do go to a smaller tech company, in the chance that it doesn't implode, it's probably going to get bought out by one of the giants

It's roughly the same problem that say people who don't want to buy from amazon and walmart have. You don't want to buy your toys from amazon that's fine, just go to toys r us... and buy your electronics from circuit city and your books from barns and nobel and... well you get the idea. Anyway even as I'm sure you are going to say the other guys are imploding from their own decisions or people making choices. But they weren't MY choices, and no matter how you look at it our choices are disapearing faster and faster. More and more businesses are consolodating and the barrier to entry is constantly getting larger.

It's still rough but it's at least involves forcing them to take a visible action to check. IE while it isn't foolproof, it is at least feasible to make a case that an employer is asking employees to show their voting record, which can be made highly announced to be illegal. Active interogation is detectable, passive isn't. You can't prove if your employer googled your voting records and then fired you for it, but you can start a public PR campaign saying "If your employer asks to see your voting record, here's an anonymous tip line that will start an investigation".

Honestly I have to say to me it seems more like most apple products. It isn't abnormally abusable etc... Compared to hundreds or thousands of devices out there available at spy gadget stores and amazon. It is however much easier to find at your local walmart and far more user friendly.

Honestly to me the real solution will probably be some kind of alias or something, that you can tie to yourself but only people you explicitly tell your registered alias/number can tie the vote to you. As much as I'd like to applaud our "protections on race/sex/religion". The reality is those protections are more or less incompatible with right to work/at will employment laws. The employer can't fire someone he discovers is muslim... but he might fire the person for "no reason" a week later, and beyond finding 10+ employees who were fired in similar circumstances in a relatively short time, it's a hell of a burden to prove the motivation of why you were fired.

Well I'll admit I didn't see the little mermaid movie. But I'd also point out 90% of the people blaming it's failure on "wokeness" also didn't see it, because the bulk of the claims of it's horribleness started on the first preview and announcement of the actress. I can say the previews made no mention of her race. But the criticisms seemed to somehow relay that her being a white redhead was critical to the story (Which was doubly ironic to me considering Disney was clearly inspired by the anime version of the same story, which featured a Blonde mermaid.)

Honestly for the most part I can't think of a time slipping a black character in has much if any real in story "OMG you are black". Now LGBT characters I'd say the opposite on, but at least partially because anything set in the real world requires some stigma, and the only way for it to be even cannon that someone is LGBT is if they either tell someone, or have a romantic relationship with a member of the opposite sex.

Well I have to say the question is how they ruined them. IE with what I've seen of the little mermaid, the part that jarred me wasn't the mermaid at all, but rather the sea creatures being the same hyper-realistic non facial expressioned type of talking animals that made the lion king a disgrace. Talking and Facial expressions have to go together.

Honestly there's a thousand flaws that jump to mind when looking at the disney remakes. But the fact that people are trying to blame "wokism" as the blame is silly to me. Certainly can give a lot to the remake concept, and just lack of understanding of what made the original work. Which is completely unrelated to the Gender/Race/Sexuality of any of the characters within it.

No the answer was all moot because humanity including Arthur weren't decendents of earths race, but rather the race of humanoid aliens called Golgafrinchans, that sent the useless third of their population to crash on earth. Basically ruining the entire program from the begining.

Honestly I disagree with the "didn't have any new features". To me circles was the one thing that made me actually have interest in social media for a brief time. As facebook got more universal, and it hit the point where everywhere you work, go to school socialize etc... people ask you for your facebook. Then of course being moderately responsible I think before I post anything "nah can't post this it could be a sore spot for my co-workers", "can't post about this might start an arguement with these people", Then when it get's out of controversial it's still "probably shouldn't post on video games because 3/4ths of the people on my list don't care about games", etc....

Circles was a good feature in that you could very easily post about games, and only have it seen by the gamers, and you could post inside jokes for friends at a specific job or place etc... as well as post on controversial topics and know you didn't include people who would be offended etc...

If you ask me the real flaw was the auto sign up pissed off a lot of people, and maybe the point of the feature was lost on most. Maybe people who like social media are mainly the kind of people that like to shout out their opinions on everything to everyone without care of if anyone cares or who might be offended.

Could also fully see that. Were dinosaurs to actually be feasible I'd imagine it have to be done mostly by guesswork and DNA reconstruction. IE analyzing the DNA of a chicken, finding the broken parts of it. Study DNA's workings harder, and over time have an educated guess of how it works.

I wouldn't say that is particularly accurate, It has been the case since the wii, The N64 and Gamecube were both released a year before their zelda games, and if I'm not mistaken the wii-u just had a re-release of the wii's zelda games.

I mean I don't disagree with you, the program is crap. My point however is from googles perspective, you leaving is better for them than you staying and adding to their cost, while avoiding every way you might possibly help them make a profit. Not disagreeing with you that youtube is a bad service, and totally reasonable for you to leave. Totally acceptable for you to try to bypass their ads, but it also makes it completely logical for youtube to chose making you quit over letting you watch without ads.

My point isn't saying why wouldn't people stick around, but rather, why would youtube care about the portion of people that neither are willing to watch ads, or pay for a subscription. If youtube premium came with all the features you listed, would you pay for it? If not, why is it even in youtubes interests to try and do any of that.

Pretty sure most of the places that adblock for security reason... are also not fans of their staff being on youtube at work.