I truly don’t understand their motivation to do this. It is the definition of anti-competitive behavior. Maybe they hope that a lawsuit will arrive at a default judgement on adblockers? Or maybe they’re just so brazen in that the US government won’t break up one of its prized conglomerates? One thing is for sure, Mozilla is going to continue to be awarded headlines
Right, but the Browser Wars are long dead and Google essentially won, then proceeded to build their business upon that outcome. It is surprising that they would opt to potentially lose their market share, (which is in the ballpark of 70% of users!), to reclaim the 10% they may be able to take from Mozilla.
** I want to add: I relatively recently watched the YouTuber Louis Rossman’s breakdown of u/Spez and his ridiculous handling of Reddit api pricing. The conclusion was basically that spez discarded his business sense to chase a vendetta. He wasn’t pricing to maximize Reddit’s profits but was pricing out Christian because the latter was more articulate about the issue at hand. I believe we’re seeing the same… that some exec within alphabet decided enough is enough and he is going to make sure adblocks die, regardless of what business sense tells us
In spite of Google’s share, the fact that you still need to go download a browser means it isn’t over. The barrier for entry is no higher for Firefox vs Chrome, and to the average user, they’re not differentiated - you could change the icon and they’d be none the wiser.
Google using their functional monopoly on search and streaming to entrench their functional monopoly on the browser in a way that’ll give them meaningful control of the way the Internet operates isn’t something we should just roll over on.
I don’t wholly disagree, but I do take issue with the “they’d be none the wiser”
Even the average person knows there are more options than the original default browser. I have no love for windows, but long gone are the days when they didn’t prompt you for “would you like to make this your default browser” when you downloaded something else.
Try changing the average user’s web browser that they’re accustomed to overnight and tell me they don’t pitch a fit
Beyond transferring bookmarks and extensions (neither of which tend to be an issue), and the different icon, what would the average user hang their allegiance off?
The prompts to use Edge are the same whether you’re using Chrome or Firefox.
Agreed… here, it’s about family, being together, chatting, laughing, just having a good time in general. Sure, there are discounts, but most people use those to just buy some new appliances (in most cases, replace broken ones).
Does Texas have something in place preventing people from getting solar? I don’t live in Texas, but my solar loan payment is a flat $200/month for 10 years then goes to $0. My buddy in Texas complains about getting $700 electrical bills, but when I recommend solar he acts like I’m recommending he cut off his left ball.
I live in Texas but have never looked into solar. The fight to switch to renewable energy will be a long one because of the politicians. Texas makes a shit ton of money from oil. Politicians will continue to convince citizens that renewable energy is dangerous, ill-conceived, and “woke” so that we stick to traditional resources. There’s nothing stopping someone from getting solar panels, but I’d assume it would be more expensive. I don’t know if there has to be prior infrastructure in place, because that would be a problem. Some people don’t even have fast internet in the Houston suburbs because they don’t want to lay all the wire for only 100 people.
Solar is awesome. It’s so cheap now that it’s a no brainer if you own a house that you’re planning on staying in for any decent amount of time. It’s cheaper than paying the electric company in most cases, and if you have a battery then it’s more reliable as well.
As long as as you don’t use ETA as an abbreviation for “edited to add”, you are ok. That shit was suddenly everywhere on reddit, god darn kids and them fancy ambiguous acronyms!!! shakes fist at clouds
Personally, a post expressing displeasure about what others are posting rings a bit hollow when it comes from an account that has been around for months but has not posted or commented anything prior to this.
Oh no someone wants a break from politics??? Unbelievable, the whole world is falling apart and they want to take a break??? Un… fucing… believable. BTW anyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi! (what an original insult)
Who cares? Isn’t the point of it being federated that you can join whatever instance and have the same experience (ignoring of course whatever that particular instance is doing for modrration)
Except one fatal flaw for Lemmy. Communities are centralized on servers and the default view is “one community on one server” instead of “that community on every server”.
Result, you can’t just go to /c/books on your server and expect to see every /c/books on every server.
Even worse, if you post on /c/books on your server, it will not be seen by most Lenny users, by design.
Instead, you have to find the biggest /c/books community and go to that server
For me, this kills all hope and enthusiasm I had for Lemmy. This turns Lemmy into “Reddit with extra steps”.
If this isn’t rectified before the form of Lemmy is finalized, this will kill Lemmy for the same reason Digg and Reddit are dead and dying.
The power to silently choke Lenny is in a few hands and I promise to you they will squeeze when the time is right for them.
This is for the moderator’s convenience. For the dev convenience and the server owner convenience.
We all know a fractured community cannot transplant itself without breaking apart. There is power is centralization, communities are centralized.
We need to take the power of moderators and give it to the user’s. Moderation must be made communally and democratically.
This means moderation is something that happens in the client. It is something the user subscribe to. That the user can change at will.
I think he’s talking about similar communities from different instances. Like “books” on lemmy.world is separate from “books” on lemmy.ml. So people will end up migrating to the larger one for more users to share with. I feel like it’s not a big deal since I can subscribe to all of them while being on a single instance.
I know you agreed with me so don’t take it as arguing, but I don’t get this logic. If someone made “books” there’s nothing stopping people from making “readingbooks” with the exact same rules and content guidelines. The problem doesn’t go away.
You said that as a lemmy.ml user in reply to a user from another instance, and I’m replying to you from yet a third. It doesn’t seem to be restricting any of us to our own instance
Is the “problem” you’re talking about that any instance may have it’s own community by the same name as another instance’s? That’s not a bug.
That lets anyone say “I don’t like that community for this thing I like, I shall set up my own on this other instance”
“I don’t like this community, I shall”… Go to an empty space talk to myself and maybe one other guy in 3 years
Look Lemmy communities have the same critical mass effect as Reddit does. For each community, there’s going to always end up with one big one, and then a bunch of tiny irrelevant ones.
It will take a reddit-sized screw up just to get maybe 1/3 of any particular critical mass community to try and scatter into the lemmyverse.
In every way that matters, Lemmy is as centralized as Reddit.
Do you hear yourself? You sound like those people who say “blockchain” solves every problem. If you don’t like a community then “federation” is not some magical solution to it.
Thanks, i pride myself on making innovative memes that point out the glaring hypocrisies of Capitalism in new and inventive meme formats. Thankfully the glaring hypocrisies of Capitalism have been around for decades giving me plenty of material for OC. /s
Lmao what is fictional about this?! Are you saying the homeless camps are fictional? Or are you saying the soviet priotitizing prefabricated apartments to increase housing supply is fictional?
Housing first is a proven strategy in dealing with homelessness. The fact that every state has not adopted these policies to help eliminate the homeless population shows this is more a cultural issue than a lack of housing.
According to the Census there are a lot more empty houses than homeless people. Let that sink in and you start to realize all is not what it seems.
Until someone is safe and has their basic needs met it is impossible to work on issues such as mental health and addiction.
The solution exists but it is going to take a lot of our time, money, and most importantly a cultural shift away from blaming people to accomplish it.
If we could fix our homelessness then we would show that we truly care about our citizens rather than just paying a lip service to our most vulnerable people.
According to the Census there are a lot more empty houses than homeless people. Let that sink in and you start to realize all is not what it seems.
This particular statistic needs to be handled carefully. There are problems with both its definition and its nature. Empty housing has a fairly broad definition that includes housing that is unfinished, in the middle of repairs, or unfit for habitation.
The nature of housing with relationship to homelessness depends a lot on where the homeless people are and where the housing is. Empty housing in towns and cities that are depopulating is unlikely to be all that useful. Simply taking people from cities with high levels of homelessness, ripping them out of their communities, and plopping them down into communities that other people are leaving is not a favor.
Also, you shouldn’t just warehouse unhoused people in whatever housing is available. Many of them have mental illnesses that need good access to mental health services, transit, and jobs. Just because they’re under a roof doesn’t mean the job is done. The housing should be tailored to the various populations that it will be serving.
I encourage you to lookup up Housing First if you have not already. While it may be misleading to say there are 16 million vacant home to half a million homeless people (32 homes for every homeless person), for the reasons you mentioned, it is entirely possible house these people.
No one who knows about this issue is thinking about warehousing people. Like you said they need a stable place to live, access to services, transportation, and work when they are ready.
I’m familiar with Housing First. I mostly just didn’t want to see a misleading use of statistics left unchallenged. Statistics around housing are difficult to grasp, so I often see them used in a misleading way, usually unknowingly.
Take one statistic, the rental vacancy rate in my city, Portland. It has lately been around 4%. Given the number of homeless people in the city, that feels like a travesty. But when you start to do calculations, that turns out to be an average of 2 weeks every four years. If you have tenants moving out after four years, that’s barely enough time to do a few repairs, let the paint dry, and finding new tenants. What seemed like a loose market turns out to be a very tight market.
I understand this building in downtown Vancouver probably had issues with people sleeping here, but placing a bunch of concrete filled pylons is fucked up.
Oh you fucking tease, I hoped that that actually exists, but at least Beehaw’s community search gives me no results. WHY MUST YOU PLAY WITH MY HOPES AND DREAMS
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.