The main issue with YouTube premium is the price, I can’t imagine that they’re making anywhere near $14 a month from showing me ads that I never click on. I’d love to see a breakdown, including how much is subsiding free users, how much is going to creators, and how much is going into the pockets of shareholders.
I think like most if not all of the people I know would easily pay $5 dollars for premium
Women can experience internalised misogyny, you can also internalise your misandry
I know you peeps probably didn’t mean it this way, but men fall victim to the same psychological traps women do. It’s not that easy to just leave a bad relationship, especially if you don’t have the expectations and tools required to identify what’s not normal
So CrowdStrike shouldn’t allow real time threat protection? That’s what caused the issue. It needs to update its threat library to do deal with any day 1 attacks. It’s one of the main reasons it’s used
Forced updates of an optional corporate anti-virus designed to immediately detect and distribute information on threats should be illegal?
Or is this just an unrelated comment?
I don’t understand how so many people are taking “Program with level 0 access shipped faulty code that caused the OS to refuse to boot until a single file is removed” as “Windows bad lmao”. Not that I disagree with Windows bad, just the over liberal application and acting like this is some sort of Linux win.
Give me kernel level access and I can make anything refuse to boot
I’ve been playing with this thought for a while, and it’s nice to see someone else express it
The people who are more likely to retain a PC and not just use a phone, are more likely to be tech literate power users.
This selects against casual windows users, and selects for hardcore Linux users
The original 20 minute video in the article makes it clear he’s talking about job roles, and mentions writers a few times (admittedly not close enough to draw an 100% certain link). I don’t think it’s enough to discredit this just based on the assumption that he’s talking about actors or that there isn’t enough context. Obviously it’s vague enough that we can’t draw any solid conclusions, so I agree with you there.
The main reason I think this is bullshit is that the guy’s testimony isn’t credible for two main reasons:
These two points, regardless of how true his story is, give him an ulterior motive for embellishing the story and exaggerating facts, which ultimately means we can’t trust this.
I’d like to see a full investigation, as with any accusation of discrimination. But we all know that when nothing turns up, it wouldn’t shut the right wingers up
At the moment it looks like what the market is demanding. A few years ago specialisation was in