It means the person you are replying to is a troll or a moron. Or both.
Wasteland 3 and Stargate SG1.
SG1 versus the payasos would be a fun episode.
Not necessarily. With some forms od tracking being curbed, just being sent the who accesses which webpage on what device when (the bare minimum for attestation) has lots of value. And google won't stop at the bare minimum of data grabbing, of course.
You know what would really help? Not showing a nice happy vacation beach image with that headline. How about some dead fish, people sweating while doing manual laboue or bleached corals? For fucks sake.
(I know NBC doesn't read Lemmy, just frustrated)
This has to be false. If only 'er' remained, the 'Twitt' would have been removed. But the twit is still in charge.
X.de (German TLD) is even for sale right now and they still didn't grab it.
Not guaranteed, but it might help you turn a 44 billion dollar company into a billion dollar company.
They haven't even secured x on some big TLDs, their design process is not the only issue.
In q wq all this is distracting, because there are many, many people who cling to thinking that just doing this or that is already enough. That's why I call this focus on individual lifestyle choices dangerous. It gives you a psychological out. "I've done something, so the problem is out if my hands now," is a form of complacency I see quite often.
Saying there are countless issues is another one of those convenient distractions. Of course its complex and there are many factors, but we have one basic issue: greenhouse gases.
We will not get to carbon neutral(or a global net negative) by slowly getting used to things by word of mouth. Not by signalling through market forces that we are willing to pay for pea protein instead of meat. It has to be political, it has to decisive and radical action at this point. A carbon tax that makes meat much more expensive instead of being subsidized. Completely changing the funding of transportation from being car focused to public transportation focused. And, perhaps most important of all, government oversight and enforcement with teeth that does not shy away from nuking a company with fines if it steps out of line too often.
All these what YOU can do talk carries the danger of obscuring what needs to be done at a societal and global level.
Saying there are countless issues is another one of those convenient distractions. Of course its complex and there are many factors, but we have one basic issue: greenhouse gases.
We will not get to carbon neutral(or a global net negative) by slowly getting used to things by word of mouth. Not by signalling through market forces that we are willing to pay for pea protein instead of meat. It has to be political, it has to decisive and radical action at this point. A carbon tax that makes meat much more expensive instead of being subsidized. Completely changing the funding of transportation from being car focused to public transportation focused. And, perhaps most important of all, government oversight and enforcement with teeth that does not shy away from nuking a company with fines if it steps out of line too often.
All these what YOU can do talk carries the danger of obscuring what needs to be done at a societal and global level.
The issue is that going electric already is a convenient lie we tell ourselves. We can't just replace all cars with electric ones and rhinkbthat we've solved it. We need to realize that the level of individual mobility by personal vehicle we have today is not sustainable.
Going electrical helps your individual emissions, sure, but we should be mindful that these are the pseudo solutions sold by people who would rather change nothing.
It isn't about getting used to anything or doing your part. Meat and plastic straws are the tip of the iceberg. By focusing on these factors we are constantly failing to address the issue substantially. They are convenient ways to make the problem seem like something that can by solved by a series of small adjustments. As everyone should know by now, that is wrong.
That's nice and all, but we can't be the solution by spending decisions and word of mouth of positive experiences with sustainable consumption. You semi-acknowledge that, but that's dangerous. The time for positive gradual change was 20 years ago, it's time to get nonviolently angry and demand change.
We need everyone to realize that it's far from enough to stop using plastic straws or eating less meat. We need fundamental societal and economic change that requires far more than simply adjusting consumption patterns.
Why even involve users? Bots posting AI generated stuff. Upvote bots upvote, comment bots comment and repost bots repost. Its the ciiiiiircle of life...
K240 studio headphones and a Samson Meteor mic. Doesn't have to be these specifically, but switching from headsets to decent studio headphones and a decent mic is a gamechanger. Sound quality is way better and good build quality makes them last longer. The only thing breaking in years has been a cable (kind of my fault as well) and they can be easily replaced, unlike most headsets.
It doesn't even have to be extinguishing. It's bad enough if meta can reap the benefits of associating with FOSS (better privacy for example), while making their app the gateway to the fediverse. And of course that app will be spyware with social media on top. It's like greenwashing.
The big AI companies will almost certainly not pay the usage fees as they are for everyone else. What this might accomplish (and might be the goal) is to bring them to the negotiation table for special deals, lump sum payments etc.
Reddit is currently trying to monetize their user comments and other content by charging for API access. Which creates a system where only the corporations profit and the users generating the content are not only unpaid, but expected to pay directly or are monetized by ads. And if the users want to use the technogy trained by their content they also have to pay for it.
Sure seems like a great deal for corporations and users getting fleeced as much as possible.