Transferring files that way actually seems really useful, I did not think of that
Transferring files that way actually seems really useful, I did not think of that
Unless, you know, they got unlucky and got sick anyways.
Misleading title. Not incorrect, but it is based on what the source of income is, it is not about how rich you are relative to the rest of the population. The title makes it sound like if you make a certain amount of money, your tax rate is lowered. Alternatively, it sounds like the richest Dutch are evading 12% worth of taxes. But neither of these are true statements AFAIK, and either way they aren’t made in the article, so the title is misleading.
Edit: Changed “the top 1%” to “the richest Dutch”.
I agree with that, it’s important to consider what’s being advertised and in what way.
I considered it before I switched from 7 to 10, but since 10 still makes it possible to create an offline account and disable most of the spyware and other bloat, I opted to stay with Windows for another generation of OS. 11 is different though, it’s several steps too far into proprietary hell.
I’ve been dipping my toes into it over the years, I’m just not ready to make it my daily driver quite yet
The second Win 10 stops receiving security updates, it’s Linux for me.
I’ve seen their ads in Sweden before IIRC. They don’t seem to be very common though. Why don’t you like that they’re advertising?
Since when is Joe Rogan bad enough to warrant getting shot in the first place? I feel like the guy has said some bad (and far more dumb) things but it’s not like he poses any kind of danger to anyone does he? I know this is besides the point, but murder is far from proportional to anything (that I am aware of) that Joe has been known to do. With that said I don’t really know much about what he’s been up to for the past 5 years or so.
Them redefining anarchism is precisely the point I was making. It’s not impossible for there to exist different definitions of the same term; you don’t have to agree with them to acknowledge their existence. And from that point of view it’s not necessarily a self-contradictory philosophy, it’s basically just fantasy capitalism. As I understand it, they are basically defining anarchism as opposition specifically to the state (as defined by its monopoly on violence). Rights to “life, liberty and property” are to be upheld by “decentralized” (and I use that term extremely loosely here) private enforcement agencies. Imo this is both unrealistic and undesirable, but it isn’t inconsistent on a philosophical level, which tends to be the level most an ancaps argue from, since their ideology is incredibly impractical and idealistic.
On a more meta level I agree that it’s just an alternative “cooler” version of libertarian capitalism for the edgier crowd, but that’s not the point I was trying to make.
Idk, I feel like a lot of these political terms have multiple definitions depending on time and context. The word “liberal”, for example, has very different meaning depending on which political group you ask, not to mention its evolution over the course of history, and its meaning in different countries and political systems. There are many valid and important criticisms of anarcho-capitalism, but purposefully misunderstanding what people mean by the word isn’t a very strong one imo.
Being an anarchist capitalist really just stems from having a different definition of anarchism than most anarchist denominations (I’m not one btw, I’ve just spent a lot of time speaking to different types of anarchists in the past). I know it’s just a sidenote and not your main point, just wanted to point it out.
Got my first Reddit account in 2012 (which unfortunately was hacked in 2020 and got shut down). So I have used Reddit for 11 years at this point. I have been sick of the direction Reddit is going for a while, and when I realized Lemmy had started seeing some traffic I thought it was time to give this place a shot. So far Lemmy feels a bit like Reddit used to, which isn’t a bad thing.
Since I started using Lemmy, not much. I am mostly on here now.
It’s definitely not worth it. Zuckerberg is the bigger fish here, at least within the social media domain. Meta’s threads replacing Twitter would make them even more powerful than they already are. I don’t like Elon, and it’s crazy that he somehow managed to make Twitter even worse than it was, but we really don’t need Meta to grow even larger.
Thanks for the update. Can you update us on whether or not you are planning to block threads.net?
Has anyone heard any comments from them on this? Reconsidering my choice of instance unless they block threads.
Can you please give us a straight answer regarding blocking threads.net? If you don’t intend to do so, there are those of us who want to know so that we can leave.
The second one made me dislike them, but the fifth one was the straw that broke the camel’s back.