Haha now if only they could do it in Times Square. That place is a giant eyesore.
I used to feel bad about using an ad blocker on the internet, but not anymore. I utilize PiHole and uBO for ad blocking now because the internet has literally become unusable without it. I never minded seeing ads, but they have gotten so brazen about it now with the most obnoxious ads possible. When the ads start negatively affecting the usability of the Internet there’s a serious problem. So they can either use respectful ad placement and get some revenue from me, or they can have them blocked and get zero revenue. It’s their choice.
I have network wide ad blocking with a PiHole server. I’ve also got a Wireguard VPN server so I can connect to have PiHole ad blocking on my phone while I’m out.
Wasn’t there once a Spotify ad for their own premium service where all they did was play annoying dissonant sounds and then was like “you wouldn’t have had to hear that if you had premium.”
I wouldn’t have had to hear that if I didn’t use your fucking app and torrented all my music, how bout that?
(I never got an ad like this back when I still used Spotify so I can’t confirm if this is real or not. Anyone else know what I’m talking about and can confirm if this was ever a thing?)
When I was a kid (way too many years ago) my parents gave up trying to restrict my Internet usage because no matter what they did I could easily get around it. I knew more about networking than they did. Then I grew up to become an IT administrator.
I dunno… A lot of the newer gens didn’t have to tinker with everything to get it to work so they’re less familiar with the ins and outs of stuff. Not to say they all are because it’s silly to generalize that many people but many of them grew up with this stuff. Just like how I couldn’t tell you how a TV works or fix one but I’ve built all my own pcs. That happened naturally because I had to learn it early on to have a computer. That being said they definitely seem to be developing a unique skill set for navigating the internet and social media as a whole. I’ve noticed they’re a lot less likely to trust a generic Google search or various articles online. I guess when you’re raised around bullshit you’re gonna end up more critical of it. This is mostly about gen z of course and maybe younger millennials. Gen alpha is feral and weird we should all be worried lmao
If they were really applying critical thinking to bullshit, mainstream media wouldn’t be forced to literally put together entire departments dedicated to fighting fake news.
I think you misunderstand the reason they need to fight fake news. It’s for the boomers. Kids these days are very media literate and skeptical of everything. It’s really all the boomers who are falling for misinformation and spreading it on Facebook.
This is very true. We had to fix all the shit happens to our systems and stuff. But now, they have perfected by implementing this restrictive environments like mac os, chrome os, and stuff like this (windows is trying to implement same thing these days too). So, their devices don’t break. They don’t have to learn how to fix that.
The fresh college grads getting hired at my work imply this is becoming an inaccurate generalization. Particularly in regards to tech. We may be reaching the brain’s natural knowledge saturation point, and with so much knowledge available, there’s a natural tendency towards a wide but shallow pool.
Also the fact that unless we have some very notable breakthroughs the tech adults of now grew up with will probably be relatively similar to those kids born now will grow up with.
We saw massive technological growth over the last 70 years especially for computer and to illustrate my point im gonna note when my mother, grandmother, and myself were born and note the standard computers available.
Me(1999) Computers were similar enough to modern ones that there isnt much to note outside of processing power and startup, sure theres clear differences but if you know how to operate windows 98 you can probably figure out windows 10 with ease.
My mother(1979) Congrats you have the apple II computer, some weird texas Instruments computers, and whatever IBM is making. The commadore 64 will be released in three years. Almost all the knowledge is irrelevent for these computers because between the internet and the march of progress not much is gonna be recognizable.
My grandmother (1956) Computers are the size of rooms and their consoles resemble radar equipment more than anything else probably cause it is old radar equipment. Colored television is a luzury item and the average person thinks a computer is someone good at mathmatics.
My mom asked my uncle to restric access.
I researched how to unblock it during my time :)
Was seemingly IP-based and the router probably just created an DHCP reservation for my device. Changing IP to static and done. They should do it via MAC. And even that is useless nowadays.
You’re not wrong. I was so desperate to get online as a kid I was pirating my neighbor’s internet on my Nintendo DS with a borrowed copy of the browser, because that was the only hardware I had with wifi access lmao.
Back when I was a kid, I ended up guessing my principal’s internet password for our local dial-up. His email was through our local phone company, so his login name was the same… So I had free internet from 8th grade til I graduated. Eventually, the phone company made it where only one person could be logged in at once, but by then I had the money to buy my own.
My parents weren’t home a lot of hours in the afternoon, and I was the oldest, so I had free reign. I kind of miss those days
I still remember the 3 passwords I got over the years. His was “kramer” and the other two were “Ozzie1” and “Chicken1”
I’m not reading you CAN’T, but filtering software is FAR better than the shit we got around. If you lock your bootloader there isn’t much you’re going to be able to do except use other devices available to you.
I gave my kids completely open internet access and just chose to talk with them on what they might encounter. If I’d locked their devices, they’d just went online at a friend’s place.
I didn’t restrict my kids Internet access, but I did tell them that even though I’m not tracking everything they’re doing online, the ISP, the school, upstream providers, search engines, social medias, advertisers, and pretty much everyone else will be.
People are so quick to forget. Back when Netflix came out it’s appeal was offering movies for viewing online. People scoffed at it because TV was king and Netflix wasn’t on TV yet, smart TVs weren’t a thing and Roku had to be built as a middleman. “Why would I pay for that”. No one believed in the products in the way that people believe in Netflix and YouTube or Google or even twitter today.
Today every tv is smart, YouTube has a YouTube TV app, all these media companies have their own apps like paramount and ESPN, and people are willing to pay.
I had a mythtv box with 1000 movies, 10s of thousands of TV episodes just so much stuff and a computer in every tv in the house. You could rewind live tv and skip ads. Most family members never switched the tv input to the mythtv box. The two that used it asked after two weeks, is there anything new?
Are you high? Netflix wasn’t online, it was DVDs through the mail that you kept until you were ready for new ones. After its online became far more popular than the legacy service, people were still pissed when they announced they were going to stop the DVD mail, even when they stopped using that original service.
The obvious problem is that the United States missed the Revolutions of 1848 because they were trying to figure out how to be the Red Wizards of Thay before it existed.
Yes, PETA does some crazy shit, but as with many things there are two sides to the story which is difficult to see when you get bombarded by anti-PETA stuff as is common on e.g. Reddit.
They are the driving power behind all the misinformation and PETA-hate that is spread around. PETA is actually doing a lot for animal rights, that’s why they are such a big target for smear campaigns:
PETA kills animals because unfortunately there are no better places for them. Blame the puppy mills and irresponsible short term owners that give up their pets a few days or weeks after getting them because they had no idea what they got themselves into. Those people create more pets than there are places for them, so instead of having them become strays and further add to the problem, PETA put down those they can’t adopt out. Because PETA accepts all animals, even those that other shelters turn away in order to not sully their adoption numbers, PETA shelters end up with many more “hopeless” animals. See more here.
The case of the mistaken dog (and how PETA doesn’t steal and murder pets):
A farmer asked PETA to euthanise a pack of stray dogs that were aggressive and violent towards the farmer’s cows. Upon arrival, PETA found the pack of stray dogs, took them to the shelter and put them down, as a free service. Unfortunately it turned out, that one of the presumed stray dogs was a pet-chihuaha called Maya, that was not sitting on the porch, as often claimed, but running freely with the stray pack, without leash or collar or supervision. PETA fucked up, because they didn’t wait the 5 day grace period to give the owners time to look for and collect their pet. That’s why they had to pay a fine and apologized for it. www.whypetaeuthanizes.com/maya.html
The monkey selfie:
The monkey took the picture himself btw, the photographer just left the camera lying around. I am not saying the monkey should be copyright holder and it’s an open-shut case, but it does raise the question about the photographer having ownership over something that was voluntarily and independently created by an animal. What if a painter would leave his brushes lying around and an animal would create a painting? The artist actually sees it the same way and settled for a compromise with PETA followed by a joint statement. This was a landmark case in copyright law.
PETA equating milk to racism:
White supremacists actually use milk to demonstrate their superiority over “inferior” (their words, obviously) lactose intolerant ethnicities. That’s the reason behind their campaign on the issue.
Final thoughts (I promise):
PETA does a good job at raising issues and are one of the most successfull organisations to fight for animal rights. The granting of rights is the only real way to protect animals from unneccessary cruelty. Animal welfare will always be arbitrary, both in what species are worthy of protection, and the extent of protection they are worthy of. You cannot consider yourself an animal lover without recognizing the importance of that.
Sometimes PETA (intentionally?) overshoot, that happens when you try to move the border of current perceptions (i.e. animals are objects to be used for food, clothes, entertainment). I am not here to defend their tone or (lack of) tact, and there are a number of (sometimes downright stupid) PETA-campaigns I disagree with. I’m not trying to convice you to become their friend, but at least judge them for what they are doing, not for what they are said to do.
Most of the criticism of PETA you read on Reddit comes straight from the mouths of the Center for Organizational Research and Education (CORE), formerly known as the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF). It’s basically a corporate propaganda organization with donors like Tyson Foods, Wendy’s, and Coca-Cola. They also run campaigns claiming obesity isn’t that major of a problem and that you can eat 10 times as much mercury from fish as experts recommend. The vast majority of the animals PETA euthanizes are suffering and are brought to PETA’s shelter by their owners specifically to be put out of their misery, but the CCF distorts that into “PETA is stealing people’s pets off the streets” and Reddit gobbles it up.
The media also knows that PETA is an easy target. Years ago I read an article in one of the British tabloids (the Sun or the Mirror) with a headline something like, “PETA blasts child’s bunny wedding!” But if you actually read the article, what happened is a kid dressed up some bunnies in wedding outfits, the “journalist” reached out to PETA and asked them to comment, and PETA said something like, “we don’t support dressing rabbits in costumes because it may be stressful for them.” And that was the end of the story, but that wouldn’t get clicks so they distorted the headline to make it sound like PETA was protesting or attacking the kid on their own accord.
For the record, I think there are perfectly legitimate criticisms of PETA, like the sexist imagery they use in some of their ad campaigns and their welfarist (as opposed to abolitionist) approach to advocacy. It just gets to me that so many redditors claim to be rational and free-thinking but then read literal corporate propaganda about PETA and swallow it whole without a second thought.
It’s their own materials and marketing, it just gets on my nerves. I hadn’t heard any of those claims about them, so the smear campaign didn’t reach me. I’m a vegetarian anyway, but yeah, I don’t like PETA.
No, I find the way they conduct themselves as an organisation irritating. Because they are brash, rude, and often come across as stupid as in the above post describing the chicken family unit.
If only we as Americans had intelligence and the will to survive that Anton Chirgurh, something might actually change, but the bread and circuses are too good for that kind of solidarity
memes
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.