FriendOfDeSoto

Any place with low taxes, low or rich people favorable oversight over the financial sector, or chance to park money anonymously is a place rich people gravitate to.

>Would that mean I'll be getting more in dollars due to that having high value? You posted the answer yourself. Every central bank designs its own bills. The US chose to be boring, bland, and hostile to people with visual impairments. The reason why they won't change that in a hurry is because it would necessitate an expensive switch in vending machines to handle different size bills. They could change the color but greenback is their brand. European currencies have pretty much always had bills of different sizes. The exchange rate of currencies depend on many things. Prices depend on many things. Comparing Swiss ones with American ones is almost pointless. Switzerland has high VAT rates (high taxes in general) and thus salary levels will be higher as well. Swiss tourist will go nuts spending stateside because everything will just be cheap to them. Because they won't finance social security, universal health care, or a bunker place for every citizen in case of thermonuclear war in the US. But they do in Switzerland.

Fans. Keep a paper/manual one on you are all times, as backup if you have a battery powered one. On those do your research to find one with a good battery. If you're running your A/C you can set it at a higher temperature if you run a ceiling fan or upright fan at the same time. Don't wear black or dark colors. Cooling packs in the freezer, wrap a towel around it, put it on your head, hold it on your hands. Just a wet cloth around your neck is great when you're out and about.

Not yet.

I think you need to read more of the article you neglected to link to. I also think your irony gauge needs adjusting. Thank you for rage baiting with us today.

The pace at replacing books at libraries is so painfully slow you stand a good chance to find an environment that's nearly free of LLM influence at your local one.

You can *help* stop your elected dickheads. Protest, general strike, a constant barrage of your elected officials with dissent. They were bombing schools in your name. Iran has been under the longest internet blackout in history (if you don't count North Korea). The things that trickle out from there are scarce and that little bandwidth may be better used to collect evidence of atrocities, ironically committed either by the regime or the US/Israel coalition. The current top 40 may be less important at this point in time. So there is a pretty high chance that you won't get a good answer to your question.

If nothing else helps, imagine how you tickle them on the tip of their dumb nose with an imaginary, invisible feather. Imagine the surprised look when they don't know what's happening. It's so annoying and they don't have a clue where it's coming from. They have fucked with the wrong person with an overactive imagination! By now, you've zoned out far enough to ignore any jabs coming your way. You wear the self-satisfied smile that only imaginary feather ticklers know. Are they possibly romantically interested in you? Just drop a casual "you're just in love with me, aren't you!" when they're annoying and see how flabbergasted they get.

I definitely cannot.

I have never heard of him. In general, I don't find YouTube a reliable source for anything controversial. I think the CIA falls under that umbrella. So I would be very skeptical.

Is there something wrong with making a new account to make a discussion post about a video?

If the video is from a platform whose algorithm thrives on controversy, is presented in a context of controversy, on a new account, it’s at least suspicious here on the lemmyverse.

So you’ve been thinking about joining the fediverse but it was this video you wanted to share with us that finally made you pull the trigger? It’s a sequence of events I find inherently sus.

Is this not a forum website?

Yes, it is. And as such it is sometimes abused by people with ulterior motives.

This is ridiculous behavior.

That is both your prerogative to think so and a matter of opinion.

I’ve been respectful and open to every single person I’ve responded to. I am not creating drama or name calling.

Your eagerness to engage virtually any comment on this niche subject is what I find suspicious. It’s the eagerness you also see by people who abuse Lemmy for rage bait.

If there’s drama being created on this post, it’s because people can’t stand Mutahar. And I agree with them! But as someone who refuses to be an ideologue living in an echo chamber, I watch content from sources I don’t agree with too, and I discuss it. I don’t get what problem you have with this.

I don’t know who that is and don’t care enough to find out. I refer you to my criticism of the source of the video. My suspicion, which I have to say your comments have not diminished, is that you created this account and this persona to generate more views to feed the algorithm on YouTube and not because you wanted to have a serious discussion about the subject.

Correction: so you made a new account on this instance and then posted it.

I'm just spit balling here. Is it possible that the intent of this post is not to have a discussion about OSs but to boost the YouTube views? It's just a vibe I'm getting. New account, very eager to reply, posting this out of the blue. If the video is on YouTube, they make a thumbnail pulling a dumb face, and it gets presented in a forum like this with a whiff of controversy about it, personally, I'll refuse to look at it.

You'd be surprised how many people don't take the time to read a long article like that but will have a quick glance at the comments.

>Again, our proposal isn’t that we should cover all of this land in solar panels, or that it could easily power the world on its own. We don’t account for the fact that we’d need energy storage and other options to make sure that power is available where and when it’s needed (not just when the sun is shining). This is a thought experiment more than a plan.

But can I tell you that - regardless of the content - this feels more like a blatant attempt at getting more YouTube views with a patreon link in tow?

I mean, logically, it would make sense to push VPNs into illegality or create a lot of gray area there if you’re also planning to introduce the Aussie social media ban. Logically. I personally think both are no good. I’ve read some headlines about illegal streaming being targeted and shut down in Europe. If there was lobby money invested, I suspect it is the likes of sports rights holders who would like you to pay them extortionate amounts of money and not sail the high seas for the price of a VPN. Modstå, kære dansker. If omnipotent deity of your choice forbid this ever lands at the ECJ I’m not sure they will side with the privacy/freedom of speech side of the argument.

Somebody is going to jump into this. But I would keep my eyes open beyond just the Chinese market. Vietnam and Thailand are interesting places to watch. V because of the relative sweetheart deal with the trumpist of tariffs. And T because they already do a lot of SSD manufacturing. And China, more than any other country, will be at the mercy of a particular person’s bowel movements on Pennsylvania Ave.

You could argue my take is too accepting of the current situation and I would agree with that. At the same time, I would argue yours is simplifying things quite a bit. Subscription TV channels came after free-to-air channels with commercials. This may depend on where you live in the world but most places have at least one local station or a selection of them broadcast through the air, not cable or satellite, and not subscription based. Financed through commercials or in some countries also through a license model (like in the UK). Cable/satellite/subscription channels are iterations on the model brought to you by capitalism. Ads in public transport can lower ticket prices. Billboards can help lower rental rates in buildings and their revenue adds to the tax intake of the community they’re in. If you think it already takes too long to get potholes fixed, it would take even longer without them. Not all roads are toll roads. I get it: you don’t like billboards. You’re going to get all these unintended side effects if they were banned tomorrow. Online ads are insufferable. I’m running 3-4 plugins to avoid them. I’m also normally watching broadcast TV on DVR so I can skip through the commercial breaks. I bail on any subscription service that adds ads. The problem online is the cause of the problem. It’s the simplicity with which data can be collected and the lack of regulation. It’s also generally still paying off a debt incurred when in the early days of www users got accustomed to getting everything ‘for free.’ Traditional media has lowered the price dramatically of its own offerings to get new eyeballs online while older streams of income still paid for most expenses, like the income from TV commercial revenue or sales of printed paper. And as these traditional sources of great rivers of money decreased over decades, the ones that replaced it were digital trickles in danger of drying out. That brought about a “militarization” of online ads, ever more targeted and annoying. This problem needs a multi-pronged approach including regulation of data collection and new financing models for media in general.

Chose your own dystopia. Where no ads exist and everything is pay per view/read/report/etc. Or the one we’re in. The bigger problem with traffic deaths is that we developed a system of transportation that relies heavily on cars that are mostly driven by humans. Removing billboards is not going to improve on that that much. But underwear model billboard pileups are a thing. But so are those caused by drivers on their phones and my guess there are way more of those. Tracking and selling of information has gotten out of hand, no doubt. It is political decisions or a lack thereof that got us here. Btw everybody thinks they’re immune to advertising. And we’re not. The unofficial wisdom of marketing is that half of any advertising budget is wasted. They just don’t know which half. So they continue. This whole thing boils down to the fiduciary responsibilities to provide as much value to shareholders again, the bane of capitalism. They cannot afford to check which half is wasted. And just for some context here: personally I don’t mind billboard ads to be honest.

I think the abundance of tools available to block ads online hints at a movement in itself. We don’t need a leader or a central committee. The wrinkle I see here is that a generalized ‘everybody’ hates ads but ‘everybody’ is also aware of the fact that they finance a large swath of stuff that we would have to pay for otherwise.

None of those ch’s are guttural and you skipped an h;)

The delightful thing is that it works in reverse also: ask a native English speaker to pronounce “Eichhörnchen.”

Best boss I ever had.

It’s an assumption that many people will be unemployed and unemployable in other functions. So far, every big change (like the Industrial Revolution or the advent of computers in the workplace) have lead to temporary displacements, and the longer ago it happened violent side effects. But in the big picture, we have found ways to put the human resource back into the machine. Accountants were supposed to go extinct with the arrival of Microsoft Excel. But their numbers have increased because they can do more useful things with their time than doing the math. The assumption may be more fear mongering. (And it’s too early to tell if you ask me.) So I don’t think they will kill us off just yet because it isn’t entirely clear that we’re not needed. It’s also possible that so-called AI frees up people and resources that can be channeled into what are chronically underfunded professions today, like teaching or medical care. We have a tendency to think in Matrix or 1984 terms of the future when more positive outcomes exist.

You want the current laws applied. I say the current laws are not good enough to get anybody convicted, no matter how rich they are. And since I’d much prefer to live in a world where I’m wrong, let’s stop arguing.

In kennels in different houses 500 miles apart.

By physically separating them until they’re all done with puberty. As an aside, not all siblings hate each other. Or what feels like hate growing up dissipates quickly when they reach adulthood.

Americans, as a general population, don’t give a shit about Myanmar, may not know it even exists. I would say that’s irrelevant for the crimes committed. And not just Americans would struggle to find Myanmar on a map. Or really care what’s going on there unless it’s rooting out phishing farms using abducted foreigners. I commend your view on the matter, that when it comes to their children they will do something. That may turn out to be true. However, that’s not going to be enough to get anyone at meta convicted under the current laws. They are running under a cover of diffuse authority and supervision internally and section 230 externally. Abhorent drug pusher comments are not admissions of guilt. They have good lawyers. We need new laws, more regulation, and fines that make Wall Street worried.

If these things were clean cut, they would have been dragged to court already many times over. For messing with teenage girls for a laugh 10 years ago. For tacitly approving genocide in Myanmar. For cheating on their video views during the highly successful pivot to video. A good lawyer will get them out of this one too with but a slap on the wrist. They exist in a gray zone where they can fuck up as much as they want to without having to fear great consequences. Vote for politicians who want to regulate these companies more.

[Icey breath] No.

I can see dead people.