We have to pay for the services we use somehow. I’d rather it be cash than the details of my entire life. But the money to operate those services has to come from somewhere

Agreed wholeheartedly. That said, Oppenheimer is officially the only biopic I’ve ever watched twice and will definitely watch again someday. Which makes it my favorite biopic, for whatever that is worth about a genre that I loathe.

Maybe let’s try focusing on content and not personal characteristics of the presenters:

https://youtu.be/Q0yL2GezneU?t=1347&si=wZjBIJkdmK8CwzIm

I’m way more annoyed by that terrible echoey microphone

Good.

“The truth is you love censorship, and so does everyone else. The only question is whether you’re ready to admit it.”

https://gizmodo.com/why-censorship-is-part-of-everyday-life-section-230-1850095976

YEP. Same. It’s always entertaining at work to watch a colleague who’s never heard my accent before hear me speak to a patient from Appalachia or the south

Yeah I’m absurdly good at not speaking in my native Appalachian accent, opting instead for a sort of “generic midwest.” Unless I’m tawking to ma day-ed-dy, n’ then all bets is awf."

My sister and I cover so well and so often that none of her four children who are literally being raised in Charleston, West Virginia has even a trace of our accent.

The irony that phenylephrine intravenous is actually effective at maintaining blood pressure in people who are trying real hard to die on ya. (Our ICU uses it sometimes.)

https://www.lhsc.on.ca/critical-care-trauma-centre/phenylephrine-neosynephrine

Preach. I hate the shit, it makes me feel shaky, but god damn does it work.

There are so many consumers MONOPOLIES now that products that aren’t good or exploit their users can still have a healthy market.

FTFY

Very Neil Gaiman vibe here

Their content promotion algorithms are not protected by section 230. Those algorithms are the real problem, pushing more and more radical content onto vulnerable minds. (The alt-right YouTube pipeline is pretty well documented. Reddit, I think, less so. But they still promote “similar content”)

It’s a rather bizarre argument, essentially saying “it’s not the whole solution so it’s not a solution at all”

Lawdamercy, can you please say it louder for the people in the back whinging that they refuse to vote for Biden because his Climate Bill wasn’t perfectly everything all at once? In the face of the Republican denialist obstructionism, it’s pretty fucking miraculous. The ultimate solution to climate change is going to be a patchwork quilt of a million different tiny solutions

Fuck off with this absolute bullshit

Oh man, let me introduce you to my absolute favorite used book seller:

https://www.ebay.com/str/secondsalecom

Also, construction leftovers on eBay are a great way to get sink faucets, light fixtures, etc. for a house.

You’re a good teacher, working around the things they find important in their lives. Thank you

Those complaints originated in TERF circles

Oh, I’m sure she’s still very pro-LGB. Most TERFs are (for now at least). It’s the T part of the equation that they think it’s acceptable to hate

If the shareholders want the corporation to blatantly violate the law, they don’t do that. They don’t have to do everything that shareholders want. Shareholders are perfectly free to sell their shares, if they don’t like what a company is doing, or to vote out members of the board, if they don’t like the way the company is being managed. The idea that corporations have no other choice is a myth perpetuated to maintain the status quo

"In 2014, the United States Supreme Court voiced its position in no uncertain terms. In Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., the Supreme Court stated that “Modern corporate law does not require for profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else”.

https://legislate.ai/blog/does-the-law-require-public-companies-to-maximise-shareholder-value