Skip to content

Google confirms more ads on your paid YouTube Premium Lite soon

Technology
273 192 3.4k

67/273

6. Juni 2025, 07:23


  • 696 Stimmen
    63 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    Can i prove it’s a majority, probably not and it seems like a lot of effort so I’m not going to, but I’ll wait while you provide the majority of examples proving incompetence over malice. What's an area where something can be done maliciously or by accident? Car crashes? Workplace injury? Incorrect tax claims? Taking something from a shop? All of these are, to my understanding (and with decreasing confidence, but all have evidence - crime stats for the first, to, HMRC estimates and this Ipsos poll respectively) more likely to be accidental than malicious. To me this is a general principle: human beings are social animals and have an instinct to be agreeable and cooperative, to live within socially-agreed rules, to tell the truth and not to fuck people over. Those who break the rules are the exception - otherwise it wouldn't make any sense to have rules and to have society. So my background assumption is that people are honest. Seeing examples of people being dishonest doesn't really change this background assumption much, because the nature of being in a society is that we point out and emphasise the times when people don't abide by its rules; we have to use more robust methods to estimate its prevalance. You yourself mentioned corruption, and again the kickbacks and favours are well established. Kickbacks to politicians in the UK are comparatively tiny though. Enough to motivate someone who's already a grifter, but not enough to cause anyone but the extraordinarily stupid to be motivated by getting them. You pushed back on this before but I genuinely think that the reason people think otherwise is because they just can't believe that (for example) Tories actually believe that the country would work better by spending less on public services and benefits. The only remaining explanation is kickbacks by the direct beneficiaries of these policies. Even if your logic isn't as formalised as that, I still think that on some level that is the feeling that makes you ready to believe that Tory politicians are so unlike the population at large - that is, massively more dishonest. Some politicians (like BoJo) have genuinely been caught lying with high confidence and high frequency, and so this baseline assumption doesn't apply to them. If state something is my opinion (or it’s clear that it is) then i should provide the information i can to show my working and how i came to that opinion, that gives others the opportunity to examine my reasoning and thought process and then perhaps question parts of it they disagree with. It's about confidence. People in this thread expressed with no hint of doubt that the politicians who wrote the legislation did it for kickbacks from big tech. This is in spite of the fact that they have no direct evidence of this and it's implausible on account of big tech being unhappy with this law. This isn't simply healthy skepticism, it's the same old useless cynicism. Politics is not the realm of headcanon I am legitimately unsure how you came to the conclusion that a discussion around politics (especially modern politics) has no room for the inclusion of the public opinion and perception of the politicians. The context was that you can't just air your personal fan-fiction about politicians' motivations and personal beliefs as if they were something more than that, so an excuse that "it's just an opinion" doesn't wash when the video linked by OP is putting this idea (that the law was written at the behest of big tech) forward seriously. By all means have your justified beliefs about politicians. But so far the only politician you've actually mentioned convincingly as being corrupt is Boris Johnson. You haven't, for example, leveled any attacks at Oliver Dowden who was the Minister for DCMS at the time of passing the Act. His register of interests does not mention any gifts or meetings with big tech firms.
  • What's going on with lemmy.org?

    Technology technology vor 4 Tagen
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 106 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    This is, I think, true. Would be pretty traditional for empires, to test everything new in colonies first, then bring it back. From weapons to beer to laws.
  • 1k Stimmen
    274 Beiträge
    7k Aufrufe
    I don't agree but I can understand that it is possible, however as someone that used to post adult content professionally on Reddit, I'm going to let you know that there is some WEIRD SHIT going on with their porn subs that seemingly Spez orchestrates at a site level. It is not like posting on Twitter (at the time, now I don't use Reddit or Twitter at all ofc), Lemmy, OnlyFans, TikTok, or any other site, adult or otherwise. Posting OC porn on Reddit is made to be deliberately difficult, you have to submit custom doxxing pictures to mods privately on any bigger sub, the little subs get very little traffic unless it's like a niche kink. They often but not always have rules like no professionals or SWers, OC only, but then allow Amaranth posts from a fan as if she isn't a sex worker like anyone else lol. Crossposting or even posting the same picture more than once across 2 forums can earn removal or bans, eg a see through top + wet panties in one pic qualifies for 2 diff subs, but I can only post that pic to 1 of them or risk permaban. And there's more actually in how difficult they make it to post but it's kinda boring in terms of details. Will say, I made my own subreddit - that got removed, no notice or warnings, even though it was active and no site violations and was doing well for at least 6 months. The girls who are popular on Reddit are not organically so. The posts that are popular are not organically so. They are being promoted by Reddit and the mods themselves. They act as their pimps and stop others from taking any attention or money away from their girls. I am not joking. He is part of the Maxwell stuff.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 77 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    I don't see Yarvin on here... this needs expansion.
  • 170 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    300 Aufrufe
    Same on all counts.
  • 42 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    71 Aufrufe
    Yesterday on reddit I saw a photo a patient shot over the shoulder of his doctor of his computer monitor. It had ChadGPT full with diagnosis requests. https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1keqstk/doctor_using_chatgpt_for_a_visit_due_to_knife_cut/