

Where I was going was: effects can be different even if all choices and results are unethical. If one cares about the possible impacts of ones actions, consideration beyond “well it’s all unethical, so whatever” could be warranted.
Where I was going was: effects can be different even if all choices and results are unethical. If one cares about the possible impacts of ones actions, consideration beyond “well it’s all unethical, so whatever” could be warranted.
are all unethical choices equal? Surely there are better and worse things?
Just criticises? Not “slams”, “destroys”, or eviscerates? Weak. No rage click from me.
nose hair trimmer attachment works well around the ears I’ve found (but it’s loud!)
cold cuts? Have you seen the price of a bag of chips? Ridiculous. I don’t need to spend 5 bucks to hate myself later after I’ve eaten too many.
$30 to buy an old mechanical pencil on ebay you remember having in highschool? No problemo.
I don’t think you can reply to a text message using a third party watch on iOS but you can with your Apple watch. I’ve seen that cited as an exclusive API.
Something is stopping another messaging app to have sms fallback and be the default messaging app on iOS. It’s iOS.
DOJ wants to get in on some of that hot euro DMA action
I get that this was written to be like, “dish soap OMG!” But there is nothing in here explaining why that might be wrong or dangerous. Why not a sentence like, “instead X lubricant should have been used because Y according to Boeing”? Underground water and sewer pipes that fit together and continuously withstand a larger pressure differential than the aircraft portals in planes use “pipe soap” to help fit the bell and spigot together. If it’s wrong, tell us why! I thought the bolts were found to be the reason it failed anyway. Even if “Boeing assembly instructions thought to be insufficient by workers” is the main message, that doesn’t grab the clicks though, huh? I’m expecting too much from a business insider article I guess. [Inebriated internet grumbling]
hypothetically cool, and very hypothetically legal
that’s a no on the cruciform for me, dawg. Yeesh. I’ll take everything else from there though, Poulsen, hawking drive, farcasters (maybe without the yoke of the AI techno core though), etc.
Is that not a compressed stream though? Genuinely asking. A 4k blu ray rip and a 4k stream from a service (or whatever it saves for offline viewing on an app) a pretty different. I think things are getting conflated with capturing live 4k television and capturing a 4k blu ray as it plays, which both might be using an HDMI cable.
oof. My guy, I salute your tenacity. These folks here are the wrong crowd to ever give an inch on that stuff though.
How about some consent and payment for my info? Swingy peephole cover thing over the camera. Offer a discount if the machine can take a picture of you. Oh that’s right, it’s only worth something when you amass a ton of the data. 0.004 cents off isn’t that appealing is it?
It’s not just what sells, but who buys what. “Demographic X buys this one product more than others so how can we advertise this product to them where they will see it?” Growth is their “valid” reason, you know, like malignant cancer cells.
Absurdity indeed!
Like a kid with a restriction. 1 minute to comply or an hour to figure out how to technically comply but get around it.
… But it was the organizers self censoring their entrants based on just the idea that the Chinese govt would take interest in/offense to some of the stories from what I can read. Haven’t seen any reporting suggesting the Chinese govt was actually involved at all. My thought is, why would the organizers hold the event in China if it was going to cause them to act the fool like this?
That was bad but at least short. I can’t ever hear “we’re going on an adventure” again without flashing back to that nightmare of a sequence of events.
gonna find some merry men and get a band going!