You're confusing prestigious with rare. Like how there are fewer albums that I've literally shat on than albums that have gone platinum, but me shitting on albums is rarer, not more prestigious.
Skates
joined 1 year ago
Linus Torvalds expressed frustration over the use of passive voice in merge commit messages, preferring active and imperative language instead.
Things To Care About, vol 147, 2nd edition
Idk if you were around when Google popped up, but it was at a time where the internet was feeling increasingly "loaded" with thousands of info per page. One where the popular engines tried to serve you twenty different things along with your search. Here's an example:
https://www.definitions-seo.com/images/altavista-3.jpg
Or another:
https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/uploaded/timeline/yahoo/yahoo-2003.png
This isn't a search engine. This is an all you can eat buffet, where the smallest plate is two main courses and three sides. And users just wanted a candy bar.
So you see, a lot of us started to use Google because it was simple. It was decluttered. It was a text input with a 'submit' button, and that's all we wanted. THAT is, and was, google's core functionality, and I think it'd do them well to remember that.
Now, if you wanna argue that's changed, I can agree to that. But I don't want morning news when I search for porn, that's just gonna kill my boner. And I don't want ads about coffee makers when I've just bought a coffee maker, that just means you're incompetent. I want a search engine that searches things and provides results. That's it. And just like Google caught momentum because they delivered this minimalistic facade that the users wanted, this is also how Google will die - at the hands of the next lightweight engine without corporate bullshit. Because the users will gobble it up.
Nah man. I'll rephrase:
Drivers are self-centered because:
- they are one of the leading causes of death, and they convinced the world their convenience is worth it
- they believe that they literally know better than AI and are better suited to have power over life and death
- they're out here tryna say passengers of AI cars should sign up to die automatically, when drivers are actually the ones who are today responsible for all deaths by car
I made it easier to understand, hope it helps.
This will never be the case. Because nobody will buy an overpriced "yo, if there's ever any doubt about, like, anything - just put a bullet in my head" machine. So nobody will sell it.
Face it - you have the same thousands of pounds of metal today, and you're the only one making decisions. You (drivers, as a community) have killed before, for selfish reasons: because you don't want to die is the least selfish of them. Other hits include "didn't wanna not get drunk with the homies", "I really needed to answer that text" and "I have 10 minutes till home but the game starts in 5, it's my favorite team, I can make it". And you somehow seem to want non-drivers (passengers of AI cars) to have the same expectation that they will be a victim even when they get a car?
Drivers are so self-centered it's goddamn ridiculous.
If I were on the verge of running a monopoly, I'd be spending my money on making anything that the competition is making, along with my usual product. Because if you let them run with it and it turns out to be the next big thing, you've just shot yourself in the leg. Microsoft is no longer just an OS maker. Google is no longer just a search engine company. Amazon is no longer a bookstore.
Diversify your assets.
You can use pyramid fragments and alien technology, I'm not touching playstation/sony products with a borrowed dick.
You are allowed to visit your employee at home when you have a very good reason to believe they are faking it
What you're allowed to do and what you should be doing are two very different things. I live in a bad neighborhood, how about if you're my manager you stay the fuck at work and then you don't have to worry about being jumped by three people with knives, and I don't have to worry about where am I going to hide a body?
Ads unfortunately have to exist if we still want all this online content
I DON'T want all this online content. I'm not on instagram/facebook/tiktok/whatever two-word website/app the next generation will worship. I don't tweet. I don't follow influencers. The media I consume is mostly youtube, and even that's been recently decreasing. The internet can die tomorrow and I won't miss anything that ran on ads, the biggest impact would be that now I can't buy things online so I'd need to physically purchase some items.
Fuck this version of the internet. If there's ever a moment that adblockers stop fighting the good fight, I'm cutting costs and just not paying for internet anymore. It's not worth it.
Effective? No. Considering the purpose of all internet communities is to grow and have diversity, it's not effective. Aside from the currently low number of users, the fact that you can have the same community in different instances means a community will never grow large enough. Add to that the "you're literally killing children if you're a centrist" people and all the tankies, and what you have here is a leftist circlejerk that will remain small and irelevant enough to suit its need to be an echo chamber without any actual diversity. So maybe it's effective from that point of view? Idk.