Same survey:

71% play on smartphones or tablets (vs 68% in 2023) 59% play on consoles (vs 56% in 2023) 43% play on PC (vs 46% in 2023)

I know there’s overlap, people who play multiple devices, but even with that, 43% is smaller than the other numbers

Fully illegal in EU

Huh, a statement that’s not been true for at least a decade

News just in: unsubstantiated rumours being presented as facts

More at 11

Because everyone thinks you’re being cowardly

That’s code for “we know that nobody would work here if they knew the answers, so we don’t want to tell anyone them”

Huh, til

The customer is always right was never a thing.

For a start, it’s an intentional shortening of the actual phrase, for exploitative reasons, of “the customer is always right in matters of taste”

Which just means “if they want to buy ugly shit, let them”

It’s called a “hyperbolic statement”, to appear incredulous to illustrate a point

YSK you can not use Google and instead use a service with no personalised advertising, such as startpage or duckduckgo

This prevents them from using things like your browsing history, search history, or personal data to serve you customised advertisements.

You also should install an adblocker, on everything that has it.

Or did they just verify an official account of a government entity?

Define Verification: to state that you approve of the user/org and officially recognise it. So they did both.

It does. Implicitly

The thing I’m arguing for is banning instances that open a floodgate.

So using your Johnny Regular example, if he goes postal, they can handle Johnny Regular, not our problem, they had no way to know

But if the server admins are like “🎉 Hey everyone! I know that you will all love to see him, please welcome Mass Murderer Johnny Regular! 🎉”, that’s when you ban the entire instance.

The SS was a government organisation, are you saying we should welcome them into our servers? Islamic State was a government organisation, are you saying we should welcome them? - No, we shouldn’t.

We’re not legalists, just cause it’s legal and officially supported by a government doesn’t magically make it moral. If an org does terrible things, and that’s well known, then allowing them to join is always bad. It’s implicit support of them.

Well I guess that’s the problem then, I assumed you were arguing against systemwide ban of instances that intentionally open the door for them.

Yeah of course, if it’s an ICE account that just joins is their own accord, let that instance deal with it, not a problem. I think it’s stupid for anyone to argue to ban the instance for something outside their control.

But if they do as bsky.social main instance did; open the door, officially recognise them, and don’t kick/ban, then the instance is bad for the ecosystem and should be treated like the virus it is. That’s when to defederate it.

a government organisation

Ain’t my government (British), and blahaj.zone is hosted in Netherlands

We obviously got off that topic ages ago

Nobody is talking about “one got let in” though, they’re talking about officially opening the door wide open, like how Bsky did.

There’s a difference

You know we’re talking about ICE, right? the literal evil paramilitary squad of a crumbling empire. The ones who kidnap children, the ones who break into homes and disappear people.

I could understand your being pissed off if it was some fucker getting cancelled for something unimportant.

But people died, people died. This ain’t the same thing.

And no, it literally does. You don’t want to turn into a nazi bar, you don’t let Nazis in. If the owners let Nazis in, you don’t go to the bar and you tell every other fucker to do the same.

deleted by creator

Search for this term “paradox of tolerance”, you’ll thank me

deleted by creator