Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short
The requests were made under the guise of anti-terrorism laws
Remember this the next time someone in government says “We need tough anti-terrorism laws”. They also get to define what counts as terrorism, so anyone inconvenient can be destroyed and the public told “We’re just keeping you safe from terrorism.”
can confirm. source: did this 3 separate times
even then, it’s essentially paywalling your rights. you need to go to court, wait for the matter to be adjudicated, hope it works out in your favor, run out any potential appeals, all while paying attorneys and not being able to do something you’re legally entitled to do. If you can’t do all that, then your rights are moot.
wages drive inflation but it’s not 1:1 and it does tend to benefit low earners.
which tv manufacturer was it that updated their eula and if you didn’t agree it bricked your tv?
I can’t help but think that if this sort of thing proliferates that it will essentially hamstring reviews. This particular agreement might be just because the game is in alpha, but it’s part of a broader trend of ToS/EULA wishlists that are so restrictive that they’re probably illegal already buy in order to test that you have to go to court against a huge, overpaid legal team which leads to people having their basic rights violated.
I WAS THE FIRST TO ADD A 9 TO A C NOW EVERY ACOUSTIC COVER FROM 1988 TO 2004 OWES ME $6
Sexual assault victims have a time limit. Copyright infringement “victims” do not. Tracks.
it requires doing it over and over again and accepting that it’s gonna make you feel kinda shitty. I’m at my best by 11am. When I used to work overnight til 5am, 11am was when I woke up. When I worked bars 5-close, 11am. Now that I work a 9-5, I’m physically there at 9, but I’m useless til 11am. When I fall asleep has changed as my schedule did, for each of those schedules I was in bed at 6am, 4am and midnight respectively. But when the machinery came online has never changed: 11am.
hard same. I’m just tryna actually have something at the end of a lifetime of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars just for the privilege of remaining alive. But the people who already have most of everything are like “Why shouldn’t I have all of this guy’s money and the house?” Swear to God we’ll only have to eat one of them and the rest will fall right back in line.
if you want affordable housing we need to de-commodify it and get the investors out. no more airbnb, no more one investor group owning 10s of thousands of single family homes. Dumping regular people’s money into this system, even if we give them a bunch extra, is only gonna drive prices even further up. The necessities of living are not speculation opportunities for the ultra rich.
honestly at this point bundle the dock w rechargeable wireless controllers and let me convert the deck I already love into a pseudoconsole.
you think that I’m in favor of everything I’m not currently talking about?
who picks what habits are good and what are bad? who decides what happens to data beyond this? can you going to mcdonalds twice a day be shared with your health insurer? can you going to that rally be shared with the local police? with your landlord? are you comfortable with everyone knowing everything? because there’s two things you do with data: analyze, and sell.
Patch your spotify install to get free premium. If they’re gonna raise prices and lower what they pay musicians, there’s no valid reason not to.
Alexa, play John Mellencamp - Ain’t That America
capitalism is when hooray and communism is when boo
I love this thing where buying something has been replaced by buying an alterable, revokable license to access that thing. It lowers costs and adds flexibility for producers, which allows them to save money, and they pass that savings on to me in the form of higher prices and my shit that I paid real fucking money for just disappearing one day. Then they explain that I never really “owned” it despite the fact that they use the word “own” in the marketing material, because it’s also legal to use words that have known definitions in agreements and then later explain that you were actually using an entirely different, secret definition of that word that’s actually the opposite of what you very purposefully implied.