[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

At least they're not running all the time, but the state shouldn't use all these excuses, when it could do other things to expand supply.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

“You know, now that this asshole mentions it, maybe we shouldn’t host stuff from these piracy communities as Lemmy’s largest instance. That might create problems for us down the road.”

I'm almost certain that's what actually went down, but I'm explicitly referring to the issue of people's perception.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Almost all of us end up creating a home system that works for the least tech-savvy in the home.

That's where I started, as a kid still at home in the 2010s. I used plex, I've been getting progressively more frustrated with it, but not sure how I'd switch to something else.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I genuinely think that the best remedy to this is to give SAG and the WGA everything they want in negotiations. It would fundamentally alter the economics of streaming if they are subject to the same sort of residuals and writer's room requirements as traditional media.

If the media corporations have their way, they're gonna break the strike by outlasting them until they "start losing their homes" from being out of work for so long that they're forced to acquiesce. Then we're gonna really get awful content as no one will be able to take any significant risks to write a weird TV pilot or make a unique movie.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I think some rural states don't, and they even allow horses and pedestrians.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

Honestly kinda legendary

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 76 points 1 year ago

Lmao this is the guy that first lead to them banning the communities right?

Love that lemmy.world seems to be making their moderation strategy based off of a troll with at least 4 alts....

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mentioned earlier or elsewhere on this thread that right now, the narrative that I'm aware of is as follows:

Lemmy.world users: just vibing, doing their thing

Concern troll: comes in with a freshly created account to pearl-clutch about scary illegal things

Lemmy.world users: hahaha look at this loser downvotes them to oblivion, resumes vibing

Lemmy.world Admins: Piracy?! OMG that's ILLEGAL, thank goodness someone pointed this out to us

If they had an existing stance on piracy, they should have been already enforcing it. Then it wouldn't look like they were successfully spurred into action by a bad-faith actor.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

So many laws work like this too, it makes them worthless if personal wealth is required to get them enforced. If Section 230 only exists for the wealthy and corporations, the fediverse isn't gonna get very far

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

If they had decided to do this a week earlier I doubt it would be this controversial.

[-] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

I sort of believe that at any given moment, most countries host between 15-30% of its population that could be considered fascist. This isn't a problem with a civically engaged populace that can easily take part in elections, which is precisely why the right wing wants to control the "quality of voter" and make it into a privilege, not a right.

The US in particular has structural problems that have, since it's inception, unfairly benefited the most reactionary segments of the US population, more so than even other liberal democracies.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

GivingEuropeASpook

joined 1 year ago