I was really waiting for this to be a Windows bloatware where Linux laptops are cheaper since there's no unnecessary Microsoft license at all. So you are principled in not wanting to use Office, but unprincipled enough to go ahead and use Windows?? That's a bold position on HN. Linux or death!!!!
My brother in law needed that laptop for his studies back then. Since he does not annoy me with countless IT related requests like some other family members tend to do and he did not have much money, i did some research for him. School supplied all the necessary licenses for free and i installed an extremely optimised Windows.
That's interesting as the Champions League is the most compelling thing for me to consider P+ subscription. Unfortunately for P+ it just hasn't been compelling enough. I feel for the Peacock subscription to watch EPL, but even with that subscription there are matches only on USA and maybe also on Telemundo. I can only imagine P+ doing similar, and I'm just not here for it
Are you saying you are purchasing a minimum of $25 to get those prime deliveries, or are you some how thinking you can pay for Prime deliveries while not also paying for Prive Video??
I am paying for the deliveries, the fact that Prime Video is part of the deal is something nice, but not what I care about, even less so after Amazon decided to force ads to people that were already paying in first place.
'People object to advertising because it is annoying and distracting. If the ads disappear, they got what they paid for. It's not about avoiding their "behavior being monitized", most people don't care about that at all.'
That's your quote as I read it in case some editing happens. There's no caveat in your original post that you are claiming now. You've moved the goal posts. As you originally stated, I agree with all of the follow up comments to it that you are now trying to expand on your original comment. Maybe that's what you always meant but just left out of the original. It happens. But now you're being obstinate about it in a way that doesn't look good.
No, you're just nitpicking the semantics and missing the forest for the trees. Everyone except you seems to understand that that was the beginning of a discussion, not an opening statement in a fucking court.
Yea, the no ads theory of the history is cable seems to be pervasive. The only ad free channels were the premium ones like HBO. It's like people think the OTA channels that were packaged together had some magic applied that eliminated ad breaks from the exact same feed as the OTA broadcast. The cable only channels like USA also had ads as well. I guess it's just another example if you tell a lie often enough people will accept it as truth
Not until that asshat company wanting to deploy satellite constellation that displays ads from space. It's not like there are billboards in the middle of the ocean
That was a stretch, really had to jam that little dig in there, huh?
Although if they did somehow deploy their constellation as a legible ad, I wouldn't even complain. "Drink Coke" spelled out with a hundred satellites would be hilarious.
I think the general correlation is that corps will find ways to make more money than they are now while they will all eventually realize data aggregation can be monetized
To be fair to a lot of people, the "experts" have a long list of goddamn stupid and horrific things in the past to make blind faith in them questionable at best. Most recently, COVID highlighted the elite panic where they thought that lying to people about mask's effectiveness was a good idea to try to conserve them for medical workers for earlier shortages, along with making everyone waste time with obsessive cleaning against a threat they already knew didn't exist. They decided to try to be strategic and all they did was prove that they were willing to lie and thought that they knew better than you. Despite medical ethics including what can be best summed up as "don't lie to your patients, you don't know better than them for what is best for them".
Reputation is hard to build and easy to break, and well every decade there are enough events to break it even before dealing with propagandists and lumping all experts into the same basket. The experts said there were WMDs in Iraq too. Increased transparency combined with a less than stellar history means that institutions have fully earned their cynical reception. Horrifyingly is the damage that such misconduct has wrought, as even when they are actually 100% right this time people have reasons to doubt them.
reply