Then again, both CAN be true.
It could be racist flame bait (I'm inclined to agree with you) with a small kernel of truth.

And I believe the answer to your questions is almost certainly BOTH.

Yes, they absolutely do. (Except for the wee bit about getting everyone to agree with them and change things, which I think even dipshits like you would agree they did in the last election.)

Then again, it's pretty much the entirety of your posts, eh? Just ceaseless dripping of bile like an infected cunt.

Nope, you don't get to redefine words to fit your moral parameter.

THEFT is taking something that doesn't belong to you. Even very, very small children understand that.

No previous definition of theft ever included "so that I have it and you don't" until hairsplitting internet lawyers wanted to be able to download things they didn't own and not be called thieves.

(shrug) in fact I agree with you that the best description of software piracy is indeed "illegal copying" but in the vernacular, simplest use of the term, it's ALSO theft. If we're splitting further hairs, it's ALSO a less serious category of theft for the reasons you put above, like (for example) taking your neighbors rake without permission, using it, and putting it back. It is absolutely 100% theft; it is also much less important than a theft involving keeping or destroying the thing, I would say that's also self-evident.

Paul Krugman, darling of the NYT, insisted Debt is GOOD
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/0...

https://x.com/paulkrugman/stat...
"DEBT IS MONEY WE OWE TO OURSELVES
DEBT IS MONEY WE OWE TO OURSELVES
DEBT IS MONEY WE OWE TO OURSELVES
DEBT IS MONEY ....

It only make us poorer in aggregate if it crowds out investment â" which is isn't doing"

(apparently disregarding the obvious, recognized, inevitable consequences of soaring debt)

Let's remember: in the US, about 20-25% of every year's budget is borrowed against the future.
We are the wealthiest society ever in human HISTORY and we still can't afford all the shit we WANT.

That's insane.

Sure they will.
Histrionic language designed to spur sympathy.

No, you're being bought by a big funding firm. Nothing here necessarily implies you're going to be "victimized" in any way.

To be clear, I personally don't like VC takeovers, which is essentially what this is - they DO tend to have negative results on companies in the long run. But if a business is up for sale, the future for that firm is not "Happy lucky everyone happy utopia" vs "terrible VC acquistion". Rather, the options are "long dwindling likely painful death of the business as the incompetents running it who put it in that shitty place try increasingly desperate efforts to solve it" vs "terrible VC acquisition".

No, what this plaintive, emotional please is all about are people who are afraid that DEI really *is* over for them, and the last few years of triumphal leftism-as-delivered-in-games "Hello I'm nonbinary" is ending, so they no longer can destroy long-beloved IP with their political horse-flogging.

So fuck 'em.

I feel slightly bad for the people who didn't participate, but like the collaborative fucks who didn't participate but who "went along with" shit like the Bill Cosby room at Blizzard, to claim they're entirely innocent is also not completely true. Sorry. Ecosystems require turnover, and - while the Saudis might like EA to continue to survive as a money-making enterprise, after all and are reasonably likely to continue to fund the creatively-bankrupt money-printing of games like Madden 912 or FIFA v306 - if they prohibit your overt political bullshit and drive Sweet Baby out of business? All good in my book.

If only Disney were next.

1) most 'piracy' (I suspect) is not massive commercial grey-copy moneymaking enterprises.
1.1) that said, as a society I think it's morally in our interest to NOT normalize low-level theft, which copying someone else's music, text, video, etc without them being fairly compensated is.
2) yet there are large numbers of such organizations that really do deserve punishment
3) at the same time, the idea that "in defense of our IP" the producer/distributors feel entitled to install harmful software without permission is also absolutely unacceptable.

Neither the blurb, the OP, nor the (sort of paywalled) Guardian article note that ITV is ONLY available to UK viewers as far as I can tell? (Maybe there is a pay version)

Or use Tunnelbear, et al.

Note that the NASA one, for all its warts, is available to everyone for free.

I know the implication is "not even half the workers have quality jobs!!" rage-bait but I rather suspect that most of the historical data (curiously not really presented as far as I could see in a skim of the OP and linked report) would show that - by their metrics - MOST people don't have "quality" employment, ever. And have NEVER had so.

Then again, it seems a very 21st century thing that people can daydream about their fantasy situation "I wish I only worked 3 days a week, half days, from home, got paid $250k/yr, had a 4 bedroom house overlooking the sea in a stable relationship" and then spend actual time bitching that "the world" hasn't provided that for them.

You don't "DESERVE" utopia. You have to make it.

Don't like rapacious corporations and how they treat workers? Vote in representatives that will aggressively control them.

"But my neighbors are all MAGA stupidheads who don't agree with me and vote for Literal Nazis!" then you have three choices:

1) try to listen to them and understand why they feel that way; in most cases people can find agreement on what they want (ie "kids to get a good education") but disagree on the means ("more funds for public schools!" vs "vouchers to put my kids in goods schools"). Understand that democracy REQUIRES compromise, find a compromise you can live with, then work TOGETHER to get it done.
or
2) just seethe 24/7 like a crabby bitch that you don't have the utopia you want and post your rage repeatedly all over social media because it gives you that tiny faint sense of validation. ...and I'll tell you which of those two will actually make things better in the long run.

Literally: https://www.city-journal.org/a...

To address large racial disparities in disciplinary actions, St Paul public schools openly changed the standards of punishment: something that would get a white student expelled would for a black student barely result in any punishment at all.

They were quite open about it.

The results were... Predictable.

They're talking about LineageOS. Think Graphene but it doesn't just run on Google hardware. Over a hundred devices and they just added mainline kernel and qemu support so it potentially runs on thousands of devices.

Sadly with less hardening. I wish Lineage would take some Graphene patches. The crazy thing is Lineage descended from Cyanogenmod which had many of these patches!

This.
How is he not immediately disbarred?

Because they didn't want to "avoid MS" they wanted to flex.

What a stupid, irrelevant post.

And I'd say you're deeply committed to your theology but whatever.

ANY long-lived species on this planet has - self evidently - survived multiple near extinction events.
What part of "repeatedly survived" is unclear for you?

10 people fall off a cliff, 9 die. 1 survives.
That one and 9 others fall off another cliff, 8 die. The original survivor and one other.
Those 2 and 8 others fall off another cliff, 4 die. The 6 survivors include the previous 2.
Those 6 and 4 more fall off a cliff, 9 die. The original survivor from the first cliff is still alive.

You "clearly this means he's going to die if he falls down a hill!"

"| Corals date from before the Cambrian explosion, about half a billion years ago.
No they don't. This is a flaw"

AFAIK Jung's study last year pushed coral/algae symbiosis back to the Devonian, no?
https://www.nature.com/article...
It's short of 500mya, but not meaningfully so to my point.

"98% of corals failed to survive the KT* extinction,"
At least from what I can see (summarized at) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ( but also from other sources ) it wasn't 98% of corals, it was 60% - the 98% is JUST warm water corals, which is basically already what I'm saying:
"Approximately 60% of late-Cretaceous scleractinian coral genera failed to cross the Kâ"Pg boundary into the Paleocene. Further analysis of the coral extinctions shows that approximately 98% of colonial species, ones that inhabit warm, shallow tropical waters, became extinct. The solitary corals, which generally do not form reefs and inhabit colder and deeper (below the photic zone) areas of the ocean were less impacted by the Kâ"Pg boundary. Colonial coral species rely upon symbiosis with photosynthetic algae, which collapsed due to the events surrounding the Kâ"Pg boundary,[71][72] but the use of data from coral fossils to support Kâ"Pg extinction and subsequent Paleocene recovery, must be weighed against the changes that occurred in coral ecosystems through the Kâ"Pg boundary.[35]"

One might argue that a 40% survival rate vs 24% (for all species collectively) in such a catastropphic event/span would strongly suggest that corals are particularly durable.