Ohhh, you get to pay based on the meters of mouse movement you do. Usage based billing, perfect.
douglasg14b
joined 1 year ago
We already do, with intentionally fast breaking switches. They get away with charging $100 for a mouse, and ensuring a $0.30 part will break long before the devices useful lifetime. Generating mountains of ewaste.
Why can't they get away with the next step, which is charging a subscription fee to use their mice as well?
Which is planned obsolescence anyways.
It's not a dopey idea, it's an enshitification one, and one we will see again because there are no consequences.
Logitech will have subscription hardware, guaranteed. They'll just go back to the drawing board on how to market anti-consumer practices better.
And similarly are antitrust regulations have done nothing to prevent companies like Logitech from just acquiring all of their competitors and then doing this anyways once there is no more competition. And even using potential competitors into bankruptcy before they can actually compete.
The bullshit asymmetry principle is in full effect here.
It takes nothing to make up bullshit and it takes hundreds, thousands, of times the resources to refute it.
Meanwhile another hundred pieces of bullshit have been created.
This is all just a bunch of red herrings and we waste so much time and effort into giving them attention.
Did they though?
Many elderly end up being forced to sell their home and empty their retirements on nursing home costs. Leaving nothing to their descendants.
The ones that die at home or unexpectedly would be the ones that leave something behind in our capitalist wasteland.
This.... Isn't how large scale technologies work. Not even close, not even "same planet" close. That's also not how antitrust breakups work, why open source private technologies? How do you think that's supposed to work? How does that precedent work?
You could open source all ~15,000+ repos from my company, and be entirely incapable of actually operating the grand majority of it. And we're, maybe, 1/10,000th the size of Google on the tech side.
You also can't just "split" a single technology apart, that's gloriously, ignorantly, simplistic. You're talking potentially years of dedicated work by hundreds, thousands, of individuals to achieve something like that. How do you expect that to operate?
It's going to be a nightmare to just rip seemingly unrelated, but interdependent, verticals of Google apart. Your request here is wholely unrealistic.
Seriously. This is such a shit situation.
The U.S. is between a rock and a hard place with Israel being the only friendly foothold in the Middle East with ports. Which enables a ton of power projection over "things" the U.S. cares about.
But then Israel is now an entity that we don't want to associate with. But we can't just let them shit the bed and allow a multi-state war with nuclear powers to take place either.
The later will hurt the U.S. in tangible ways, for decades to come.
So what do you do? Do you knowingly cause damage the security interests of country, or do you follow the social/societal expectations that we don't just fucking kill innocent civilians and let Israel eat the lunch they made... Indirectly enabling a war which you will get drug into regardless?
Shit sucks, everywhere. And Israel are being the baddies, while the U.S. is enabling it.
They could, but as it currently stands media hosting on the fediverse.... Sucks.
It's obscenely expensive for everyone involved, and scales poorly. It's just not ready to operate at scale at this point.
I'm sure it will get better, but large storage costs are better off being handled by a distributed file-system where a minimal level of duplication is baked in, but the storage load is reasonably spread out instead of fully duplicated on each peer.
There are technologies for this, but they all have their own issues. And tomorrow there will be n+1 distributed filesystems, fragmenting it further.
why is this here
Because it's relevant?
Don't let a bad thing go to waste, it's a great opportunity to shore up, improve, and accept migrating users with friendliness and openness.
A great time to share the ideology behind decentralized social media.
Just like "here", with "here" being where?
That doesn't answer the question.
Domains can expire, be sold, have their hosting (nameservers) changed....etc it's very conceivable given the current climate that it could be a malicious site used for data exfiltration from prospective voters. The security posture, if any, of the owner are also unknown, meaning it may be unknowingly compromised.
Especially when you have people willing to drop tens of millions of dollars on voter suppression.
Plain and simple, don't enter your personal information into a 3rd party site. Use your official government provided ones for this purpose.
I'm not sure why you're so dismissive of this? It's kind of asinine.
Does everyone everywhere only ever use computers in an enclosed room? Is everyone with something value to exfiltrate easily accessible to kidnap and beat with a wrench?
This is valuable for corporate espionage, political purposes, or for nation states. If miniaturized, even easier for targeted attacks where it might be difficult to inject malware, or for broad attacks on office workers.
And the best part is that it doesn't leave a trace which beating someone with a wrench and malware would do....