There’s a reason scam artists target the elderly. If a box on the computer screen says “put payment info here” then who are they to argue with the box?

I’m still convinced that he’s actively and intentionally trying to destroy Twitter.

Well, let’s talk about when Twitter was founded…

Try finding a dumb tv for sale of relevant size and quality. I know you don’t have to connect it to wifi… Usually. But I just want a TV that doesn’t have all this shit in it to begin with.

They have become the evil they were once apart from.

In a streaming landscape dominated by ad companies like Google and Amazon, Roku was once the viable alternative. Unfortunately, in the 21st century, enshitification comes for us all eventually.

Give me freedom from advertising or give me death.

Just as venture capitalism demands.

Waterproofing is a lame excuse that I won’t accept from these manufacturers. It may be not as easy as just permanently gluing the thing together, but it’s definitely possible to have a sealed battery compartment.

So you’re just out here trying to start a riot, eh?

Rich people’s real estate investments would lose value if we suddenly didn’t need massive office buildings.

These are some very pretty words that express ideas without much self-reflection on why the ideas might be bad.

I mean, I suppose you did say it yourself that you can’t trust the US government… but why would you trust ANY government? You know why I trust Google more than any government? I understand Google’s motivations ($$$). Put something into the hands of government and suddenly that thing is burdened by the desires of every politician and their special interest financiers.

“Place it in the hands of something like the UN” would mean some international body I assume. Comprised of and led by whom exactly? And also, who would fund the thing? You suggest nationalization, so… taxpayers? Sure, here’s your $99/year Degooglebase access fee tax I guess? And beyond just making sure there’s enough money to keep the lights on, we need to make sure there’s enough money to pay creators. After all, YouTube isn’t just a library. It’s an economy larger than some countries and there would be consequences to destabilizing that economy. People aren’t just posting content for the love of the shared experience.

Please don’t take what I’m saying here to be a defense of Google. Google is a shitty company for so many reasons. But advocating for nationalization of YouTube is just a horrifically bad idea in such manner as it was presented.

But - all is not lost. First: for the creators you enjoy - find ways to support them other than Google. Make it possible for them to continue when YouTube stops being lucrative enough.

Second: find, use, and advocate for the use of alternative services. There is no single site that is going to be able to replace YouTube. It simply isn’t going to happen unless PornHub wants to step up to the game and create their own SFW site YouTube-killer. They have the infrastructure and capacity to host and share absolutely massive amounts of video and have the business capabilities to accept income and pass it on to creators on a large scale. But that’s an entirely different discussion.

Best to look at things differently. Like the Fediverse and the internet itself, it might be better off if the platform were distributed.

Let’s not pretend like Google isn’t earning any money

I tend to agree with your last point, especially because of the way the system has been bastardized over the years. What started out as well intentioned legislation to ensure that authors and artists maintain control over their work has become a contentious and litigious minefield that barely protects creators.

Let me ask you this: when have you ever seen ChatGPT cite its sources and give appropriate credit to the original author?

If I were to just read the NYT and make money by simply summarizing articles and posting those summaries on my own website without adding anything to it like my own commentary and without giving credit to the author, that would rightfully be considered plagiarism.

This is a really interesting conundrum though. I would argue that AI isn’t capable of original thought the way that humans are and therefore AI creators must provide due compensation to the authors and artists whose data they used.

AI is only giving back some amalgamation of words and concepts that it has been trained on. You might say that humans do the same, but that isn’t exactly true. The human brain is a funny thing. It can forget, it can misremember. It can manipulate. It can exaggerate. It can plan. It can have irrational or emotional responses. AI can’t really do those things on its own. It’s just mimicking human behavior at best.

Most importantly to me though, AI is not capable of spontaneous thought. It is only capable of providing information that it has been trained on and only when prompted.

Right. Which is exactly why removing tactile knobs and buttons is stupid.

You might be able to adjust things without taking your eyes off the road fairly safely if you had some sort of tactile feedback. Like a knob to adjust the volume of the radio or another knob or lever to adjust the heat/AC. I doubt you could do so just as reliably and without accidentally hitting a different button with a touch screen without looking at all, but even if you can, most drivers couldn’t.

There’s also a learning curve to contend with. Put me in a car with a standard stereo that has a volume knob, and I’ll be able to use it without looking pretty quickly and without error. Put me in a car that has only a touch screen with a UI that is different from every other manufacturer’s UI, now I have to memorize where buttons are. And until I have it memorized, I have to look.

It isn’t at all reasonable or feasible to suggest you shouldn’t adjust any control unless you’re stopped. That completely ignores the fact that the US is comprised of many highways and interstates that won’t have any stops for hours under the right conditions. You’re telling me that you exit the freeway just to adjust the AC? That’s a lie and you know it. And again, even if that’s the case for you, it isn’t the case for most drivers.

Cars marketed to the masses should be designed for use by the masses and should be designed with safety in mind. These are 80 mph tin cans that can do a ton of damage and need to be treated as such. Especially modern EVs with batteries that burn with the light and temperature of 1000 suns when damaged.

Also “every other driver is staring at their phone” sounds like a disingenuous way to suggest that taking your eyes off the road is okay because everyone else does it too. Yes, lots of people do, but lots of people do not, and just because some do, that doesn’t mean we should design our cars in a way that requires the same level of inattention.

They were always going to. As long as Xitter has a user base with money to spend, the large corporations do not care. Anything they do like withdrawing advertising is all for show.

And after all, are you going to cancel your Netflix subscription over this? I actually probably would personally but my partner uses it quite a lot, so we’re sticking around. Some people will cancel no doubt but nowhere near a critical mass that will affect their bottom line and they know it.

Don’t worry, it’s completely acceptable that you neither know about nor care about a billionaire’s daughter.