It’s not even mean. And this isn’t some niche sub specifically about Sync. It’s the most generic sub imaginable. Are they paid by Sync?

FYI Izzy got permabanned for stating this opinion. That’s really insane.

One more reason I hate sp0tify

I 100% agree but I still appreciate anarchism as a critical position. Not a system to actually implement, but a criticism of the corrupt nature of the current regime.

I’m not an anarchist but I’d miss their perspectives if they weren’t around.

The fact that public healthcare probably won’t happen is different from the argument that we should trust predatory insurance companies.

Plus you don’t have to go to China for public health care. You could go to Canada or the UK, obviously. And they’re capitalist as fuck. Although capitalism will likely get rid of their public healthcare eventually, they haven’t succeeded yet.

Cumming to my relentless trust for insurance agency middlemen.

The only problem with people being on food stamps is that their jobs either aren’t paying enough or there aren’t enough jobs. But it’s 100% excellent that food stamps are available.

If he wants to encourage people to eat healthy then that would be a fine song I guess. But he’s talking about restricting snacks for fat people in a song about how rich people are ruining his life. Just admit that it’s fucking stupid. Fat people eating snacks are not ruining his life.

What’s the relevance of “obese” and “300 pounds” people specifically eating gov’t fudge when no reference was made to them making $80k or otherwise not being poor?

He is actually just stereotypically misrepresenting the social safety net as being government fudge for fat people. It’s fucking stupid. Don’t let this be the icon of libertarianism.

His political ideology is 100% the point of the song. It’s the only thing he’s singing about.

You’re acting like he did an instrumental song and people ridiculed him for past behavior instead. No. He’s complaining that poor fat people eating government fudge is ruining his life lol. He’s a fucking moron.

Let’s be more specific and find out how much public money was spent on sugarry snacks for fat people, which is his ridiculous complaint. I’ll assume we’re not psychopaths who are generally against a social safety net.

I invented the left handed pizza peeler.

Spotify is garbage. You pay them to basically pirate unlimited music (they pay table scraps). They have no values or integrity, but they do have a greedy business model.

I buy albums off bandcamp instead. Or from the artist’s site directly.

Can you offer some examples of where “being vulnerable” led a man out of depression?

I do agree that there is a culture of masculine shame around mental health, and it can be unhealthy. But I’ve also seen that those who share their feelings don’t get the promotion, tend to make coworkers uncomfortable, drive women away. Life is still a competition and vulnerability is genuinely risky.

I’ve seen bullies strategically share false vulnerability to garner sympathy. Genuine vulnerability often looks gross from a man, and is unlikely to lead to positive outcomes.

Most importantly, this new wave of mental health problems is not caused by a new wave of “not being vulnerable.” It’s a societal issue and must be confronted there, not shunted onto each individual man.

If they “disrupt pollution” by for example peacefully protesting at an oil rig, they risk life in prison on terrorism charges since that’s how insane the laws are, in exchange for little to no media attention

And there’s a reason that actual disruption is illegal, and performative nonsense carries lighter consequences. The reason is that oil companies absolutely LOVE for protests to be ineffectual and just cause disruptions among leftists. Obviously these “gluing myself to stuff” protests have NOT helped the environment. Nobody ever actually thought they would.

Then they should disrupt pollution rather than something totally unrelated.

When you vaguely tell somebody to read more it’s because you have no actual argument.

There is no connection to environmental issues. They are doing this to look cool to their friends.

No, but they should be coherent and meaningful. These fools (or possibly goons for oil companies) who attack paintings are only making environmentalism look utterly stupid. They are openly mocked by everybody because they’re lashing out incoherently.

They’re actively working against environmentalism. I really think they’re bad, selfish, narcissistic, and stupid people. They don’t care about the environment.

There is absolutely no reason to think their ridiculous behavior could possibly help the environment.

I had no idea, but apparently the co-founder of Mozilla is also the creator of Brave and inventor of Javascript, and was removed from Mozilla after giving $1,000 to support anti-gay-marriage efforts. That’s quite a career.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mozilla-ceo-resignation-idUSBREA321Y320140403

I blocked the whole instance. I’ll admit that I do want to see nude females (who are obviously adults) but I was seeing lots of other stuff that I don’t find sexy, and blocking specific communities was like playing whack-a-mole.

They’re still bad people, but this kind of blame has to run uphill. The devs only have the option of quitting, not necessarily of not doing what they’re told.

That being said, I bet there are some Very Good Boys who enthusiastically and proactively suggest some evil shit to the execs.