![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8ac49c8c-50bf-4a62-9c68-59d3da999bf1.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
That’s very illegal in the UK and EU, oh my.
Hi there!
That’s very illegal in the UK and EU, oh my.
Why not just open the door with the key like every car ever
But if labour can afford to live, how will we minimise their ability to focus what little energy we leave them with at the end of their shift on improving their situation?
Paying a living wage is a slippery slope that ends in things like healthcare, education and opportunities being available to all, and that’d make them more than just our bought and paid for production labour, that’d make them our rivals.
I don’t think people are “refusing”, it’s not like it’s mandatory or anything. Nobody’s trying to force you to drive a car.
I know I’ll never be able to afford a car, they’re incredibly expensive to buy and operate, and most of my travel is already covered by our excellent Trams, Buses and Trains, which can get me basically anywhere comfortably and quickly.
For the times I need something special I can ask someone for a lift, but that happens only a handful of times a year. A car would be a big, expensive, risky piece of equipment to just leave sat around for someone to steal…
That’s just one country of many, I don’t think that guy winning leadership of that country would affect how Google manages my information.
Nothing about how viable it will be to bring to market, if ever, just discussing R&D without much content.
Potentially always good to see these sorts of improvements :-) Is just not that impactful until they can make it useful. If it’s 50 years away from being producible at scale? Eh. If it’s only 6 months away and can drop in to existing pipelines? Hell yeah!
How does this answer the question?
I’m a little tired of this platform constantly shouting 24/7 about how we should all use Linux all the time, everything else is terrible, etc. Yes Linux is great, I use it a lot, I love it.
I don’t need it constantly shoved down my throat this way though. I especially don’t need it’s users to act all high and mighty and shame me for daring to still use Windows.
I know the pros and cons of using both and I use both for various different tasks. When somebody asks a question about Windows, just telling them to switch their entire operating system to Linux without knowing anything about their situation or why they use the OS they use isn’t answering the question, it’s not even trying to answer the question.
It’s just saying “you’re stupid for using Windows at all for any reason, and I refuse to engage with your actual question or try to help you at all, I’m just here to tell you you’re wrong, your personal life choices are bad and you should do what I do instead”.
I appreciate how great Linux is, but let’s not try to convert everybody to your way of life at every opportunity. Let people live their own lives and make their own choices, whether you agree with them or not, and if they ask a question, seek to answer it without shoehorning your own agenda in. That’s all I ask <3
Steal. Might steal. If you’re going to write an article as a journalist, have some guts and write the truth.
Huh? What if you’re installing windows on a machine with no internet connection? Which is an entirely normal legitimate thing to do. It’s not a requirement after all.
I have a number of machines that use a local account, they don’t need a Microsoft account and will never be linked to one, it’s unnecessary.
I see you! 😊👋
Not what you or the Supreme Court thinks.
Phew, good thing the courts in the USA - (a country with sadly laughable protections for people’s rights compared to other large developed regions like the EU) - are the only courts in the world, and what they do is the only thing that matters.
Thanks for telling us all what we think, by the way. Where would we be without an American telling us all what we think?
We’re so lucky.
That’s pretty much the definition of the job of parent. To control everything around the child and how they interact with things.
It’s not any more difficult than it ever was. For one thing, don’t give kids a smartphone until they’re at least 13, they have no need for one before then.
Similarly, up to that age, they should be taught how to use a computer and the internet, but only in a closely monitored, safe manner.
After 13 or there abouts, they are given more freedom and more responsibility to go along with it, and hopefully have been raised well enough to respect that.
From there, limitations and guide rails will remain in place, be it a traditional curfew in the evening, or a limitation of “screen time”, and if course of what the children interact with online.
Greater autonomy is earned through positive actions and mutual respect, too. Over time as they approach adulthood you will be able to loosen restrictions and worry less, as the strong person you’ve helped raise will be able to make their own decisions with greater confidence and more positive outcomes.
Mistakes will be made on all sides along the way, there will be joy, sorrow, anger, love, parenting is a learning experience for all parties, but in the end, if all goes well, you’ll have a well adjusted young adult who isn’t addicted to their mobile phone or any of the apps contained within, who understands the dangers of such things, and how easily addictions and a warping of reality within the mind can set in.
Eventually you have to let go, let them be adults and make their own decisions, but by then they’ll have this deep understanding of the dangers they face, and that’s the best defence they can have.
It still might not be enough, but all you can do as a parent is try to prepare them, from then on they have to make their own mistakes, you know?
Anyway yeah, that’s how I think about it :-)
mmm, it’ll be a cold day in hell before I call them Meta, it’s a very transparent attempt to psychologically reset our opinion of them, as if we’re all stupid.
It’s insulting how thick they think we are.
They’re Facebook. Call yourselves “We didn’t do evil stuff we’re good guys honest” I still won’t believe you …
Woah now, what are you, some kinda red socialist commie? 🇺🇲😠🛻
Being sacked isn’t ruining someone’s life. There are other companies, other jobs. It’s hardly the end of the world.
What you’re saying is “I want him to know it’s okay to keep doing this to other people with no consequences”.
The law requires YouTubers to identify sponsored segments.
In which countries, though? That’s a key point that seems missed from a lot of responses discussing “the law”.
Laws vary quite significantly from nation to nation, and without that key context, there’s not much that can be garnered.
The full quote if you don’t want to read the article.
Or can’t afford to.
I ain’t giving some random news website more money than I pay monthly for my Internet connection just to read some article about Spotify, they can go screw xD
No no like, that classic golden oldies singer, Britney Spears!
That assumes you live in one of a small number of countries for which politics significantly shifted after one of those countries was attacked.
And also that you’re at least old enough to have had a reasonable mature understanding of the political landscape before 2001, so as to appreciate how things changed. Let’s assume that’d make you at least 20.
…So, we have to be at least 43 years old, and American, or you’ll assume we’re children?