More like going into a church and complaining that there are too many pedophiles.

In the same vein, my friend frequently tells his fiancé to quit being a f*ggot when he doesn’t want to eat something unusual or complains about mild annoyances. Which always draws hilariously confused looks from nearby straights who don’t know them very well.

To be fair, we absolutely should outlaw at least 99% of all currently practiced forms of advertising and make it so that new forms of advertising have to be whitelisted by a panel of psychiatrists, sociologists, environmentalists and urban planners before they’re allowed.

Alternative title: how annoying people have adapted to not being able to annoy everyone as easily as before.

Nipple Batman made balconies useless?

Removed by mod

If you interpret these sayings as “just wait around without doing anything and the problem will fix itself”, then you’re missing the point. The point is that everything is always changing, and that includes the situations in our lives and how we feel about them.

When you’re at the bottom of a slump, it often feels like it’s going to stay that way forever. But this feeling is an objectively false view of reality. Reminding yourself that “this too shall pass” can help to cut back on the despair and allow you to focus on taking steps to prepare/help the healing process rather than just giving up because right now it seems like it’s pointless, life is suffering, God is a lie but the Devil is real, and everything will suck more and more forever.

Not “again”, “still”. This attempt to illegally silence everyone who has anything bad to say about him has been ongoing for years and years and is only ever going to stop once he runs out of money to pay his enforcers lawyers.

… with blackjack and hookers.

Termux has been a thing for years.

In other words, the consent of a corporation is more important than the consent of a human being… for the public distribution of that human being’s likeness in an intimate context. Holy dystopia, conservatives are fucked in the head.

He only really wants to be a dictator for a single nanosecond. But that desire renews itself each nanosecond.

EULAs don’t have to say “you own this forever” because it’s implicit. Just like when you buy bananas at the grocer you aren’t forced to sign a EULA that says you can eat the banana or make a smoothie with it but can’t use it to make nuclear weapons or commit war crimes.

Let’s break this down: a product is an object that is delivered to a buyer. A service is an action or group of actions that is performed for the buyer. If I have to keep running my servers for your game client to connect to, push updates or offer tech support, I am providing a service because it requires me to keep doing something for the thing to work. If, on the other hand, all I do is give you some code you can run entirely on your machine - and it doesn’t matter if I give it to you on a CD, a floppy, via digital download or if I print it out as a big book for you to type yourself into a hex editor - then our transaction is finished when I deliver it to you and you pay me. There isn’t anything to license because now you own that copy of the code. My participation in what you do with it is finished, just like the grocer’s is finished when you leave his store with the bananas.

Do you understand now?

[Citation needed.]

No, crimes exist for whoever isn’t in power. There are several crimes that can only be committed by rich people, such as those related to banking and the stock market, formation of cartels* and monopolistic/anti-competitive practices, etc. But conveniently the criminals are only prosecuted when they are the political or commercial opponents of whoever happens to be in charge at the time.

*Not the drug kind, the “a small group of companies with a combined market majority conspires to fix prices while pretending to compete with each other” kind

Rotated 180 degrees.

They didn’t say better for whom.

Does drag have proof that the other user is a statistical model, or is drag guilty of dehumanizing others to fit drag’s agenda just like a Nazi would?

It’s easy. He chose an arbitrary number that was very big but just shy of 99% unrealistic, according to his own flawed judgement.

The only real difference is that Google pretends to be open and Apple pretends to be privacy-focused. It’s the illusion of choice. They’re both selling their users’ data to the same people.