We define people by their labor value in capitalist societies. It only makes sense headlines would refer to people thru the lens of their previous employer.
We define people by their labor value in capitalist societies. It only makes sense headlines would refer to people thru the lens of their previous employer.
Basically, AT&T argues against it saying it’ll force them to innovate and be competitive with other services.
Won’t anyone think of the poor telecom shareholders??
Well they do have the whistleblower expansion pack too if flying the plane isn’t near death enough for ya
Soooooo VPN?
I mean, it’s not really a false dichotomy though? Your statements suggest that we assign fault/root cause to the consumer. I’m suggesting we assign root cause to the manufacturer/lack of regulation. If at the end of the day, it’s the consumer’s fault they chose a product without conducting a comprehensive quality review of all components within the product they purchase, then the action of pushing government regulation contradicts that. Funding regulation doesn’t do anything to fix consumer behavior; i.e. root cause. But maybe I misinterpreted your statements.
As for your first statement, there are many problems with this reasoning. How can we reasonably expect consumers to perform comprehensive research studies on everything they purchase? If it turned out the specific manufacturer of Grade B wool that’s used for a certain sweater from a certain clothing brand is known for causing latent forms of cancer if worn for 2 years, that’s really on the consumer? C’mon now.
Besides, in this specific case, it turned out to be a catastrophic latent failure. It wasn’t even possible for an informed consumer to have predicted this sort of catastrophic failure.
By that rationale, we should be blaming those who picked a certain brand of hamburger meat for getting salmonella poisoning? I would think we’d want to push responsibility on the corporation and governmental oversight for change in food safety standards than mock those who got sick.
Ehh…iOS is arguably the most secure mobile operating system (excluding something like GrapheneOS) currently on the market.
I don’t give a shit what brand you use, because I don’t have brand loyalty, but I can see valid reasons for why someone might want to use Apple Macbooks. Shitting on the consumer here does no good. All consumers deserve the same amount of consumer protection, regardless of which tech overlord they happen to purchase their hardware from.
Eh…you can pick any two examples and show anything really.
Ah yes. The ancient ios vs android debate.
They each have their use cases, and I can understand the justification for using either.
My specific threat model (similar to high profile journalist covering topics that expose wrongdoings in high positions of power) has me using iOS, where the cons of being locked in Apple’s walled garden don’t outweigh the benefits of having a robust, secure operating system right out of the box without much setup and maintenance (i.e. Lockdown Mode).
Other folks’ threat models have android on the winning side. It is highly personal, and making grand statements about one being better over the other is childish.
The only other option that I see as more viable is GrapheneOS on a Google Pixel, but I have yet to make the leap. Maybe soon.
I know seriously lmao. I mean I know it’s anecdotal, but I’m in the US and my friends and I constantly criticize the US. Most people I know tend to agree with most criticisms, myself included.
It’s satire. And it’s apparently doing its job swimmingly because people are on here talking about it.
I’m not familiar with the typical procedure for determining repeat missions either, but if I know anything about management and people in a position of power, it was likely a tantrum they threw after they realized they got bested by someone “beneath” them, and it was their way of coming out on top (at least in their minds) in the end.
“Oh yeah? Well, we’re not gonna allow you to fly into space again! 😤”
Like the time management “punished” me by moving my desk away from my coworkers when I stood up for a coworker’s opinion during a meeting that went against management opinion.
Oh no, you’re moving me somewhere where I’m not gonna be harassed and distracted by my coworkers 24/7?? I’ll get peace and quiet to focus on my work? What ever will I do!
It’s just something to get the upper hand to make them feel more in control. I’ve never seen more immaturity and sensitivity in people than I have with those in management and positions of authority (of course there are certainly exceptions, and there have been instances where I’ve had wonderful managers…but they are a rare breed indeed).
Yeah idk I’ve read it like 4 times and still struggle to find a coherent thought here.
Anti-shit underwear? Sign me up!
The “signing up for Planet Fitness membership but not actually using the gym” is the real idiot tax. Well, yeah, I guess this one is too.
I mean you’re not wrong in a sense. Their marketing campaign centered around targeting a specific demographic (high income insecure millennials)…those that would spend a lot of money to get their own exercise equipment than go to the gym with other people around.
Now there’s nothing wrong with that (with wanting your own exercise equipment, at least). I just wish people realized other gym goers don’t give a shit about you. I literally don’t remember anything about anyone after the gym (like “wow that dude was so fat”).
But alas, here we have our lovely corporate propagan-….I mean “Public Relations”…manufacturing insecurity in the mind of the consumer.
As much as I dislike Planet Fitness’s predatory business model, I do gotta say they used this “gym insecurity” manufacturing from other PR firms to their advantage. “We know you’re insecure about going to the gym. Here’s a gym for the regular joe. Super cheap and the gym won’t have those judgmental gym goes (who never existed in the first place) that other gyms have. It’s only $10 a month! Yeah, we make it so you literally need to give us your left kidney in order to cancel your subscription, and yeah 90% of our revenue comes from people who never actually use the gyms, but hey, if you’re one of the 10%, then that’s even better since the 90% basically pay for your membership, new equipment, clean gym, amenities, AND the gyms won’t be crowded!”
So yeah…predatory as fuck…but at least their PR campaign centered around taking advantage of a manufactured insecurity rather than adding to it? Or maybe by perpetuating this myth that there really do exist a bunch of toxic gym goers at other gyms isn’t really helping…I’m not so sure now haha.
WhatsApp? Isn’t that just like, a messenger? Would think you’d want better friends if you’re encountering hate speech in your group chats haha