Agreed. I’m friends with a few journalists and even the ones who had a steady job at major outlets were working it like a hustle. There really isn’t a good way to do it that doesn’t involve some level of either corporate or wide-public investment and both of those have an easy chance to get corrupted.

I mean, yes, but they’re minimal. They don’t charge enough for a subscription to fully cover their revenues. Plus serving ads has always been something news outlets have done for revenue.

But hey, if they can just fuck off, I guess we can maintain either ads all over the page or let Sinclair/Newscorp run everything.

The issue isn’t data transmission and hosting, it’s paying someone a living wage to do this work professionally, along with their editors, graphic artists, analysts, and everyone else along the way that writes the news. It’s a bit absurd that people complain about ads and low quality reporting/analysis while simultaneously demanding all journalists work for free. Hell, if you get a library card you’ll probably be able to legitimately access the article right now for free in a way that still pays the journalist.

It’s very common for teens to be impulsive and reckless because they’re basically biologically programmed to be so. It’s not something they can control, really, it’s something they’re experiencing. If you didn’t go through that, it’s all good, probably safer frankly, but it’s not like people are aberrant for being reckless while maturing.

Not really, that’s a minor part of the opinion. The more important part is they tell you how much food you’re going to get of what kind and then they give you that food. I don’t think anyone would be able to win a case on “my burger didn’t look like the burger in the ad” because every burger looks a little different. Lots of things that are the same don’t look the same and let’s not suddenly pretend we get McDonalds for the appearance. They’d win false advertising if, say, a quarter pounder was only 2 oz.

I dunno, seems like the judge is explicitly acknowledging it.

Building up a new economy is not a crash. A crash is when the current system gets wrecked and it’s possible something better emerges from the ashes. The problem is that an economic crash primarily hurts the poor, even if they don’t own the stocks/property/means of production. They’re the ones whose jobs and homes are lost.

Consider, for example, the Bengal famine. Entirely economic, there was literally enough food but it became prohibitively expensive due to market forces driven by the British. The rich British aristocrats didn’t suffer, Indians did. In Venezuela when the market crashed, rich people got out or are able to weather it. Poor people are either stuck having to attempt to make the best of a terrible situation, or flee and seek aid as migrants.

People thought that was the case with finance until 2008, instead we had people left homeless and jobless for years. Wealthy people have a safety net when the system fails. Poor people do not. If the U.S. crashed, people would die from the fallout. People died in the last recessions and they weren’t mostly the rich.

I think you’re wrong about the car example. The reason people don’t know how their car works now is because so much of it involves proprietary software that you cannot fix it with physical labor. You have to understand and debug the code as well. Additionally, the manufacturers and dealerships have made accessing the parts (both on the car and replacements) so difficult that there isn’t really a universal approach to fixing the modern passenger vehicle anymore. Millenials didn’t stop fixing cars themselves out of laziness, it was because the knowledge needed to do so was greater than the cost of having a professional do it and have the repair guaranteed.

Meanwhile, though I understand that touch screen and app-based OSes are pretty difficult to program for the average consumer, it’s not the only option for computing, just a popular one. This also has nothing to do with whether what you’re downloading is safe.

But that’s not really a good reason to not have regulations. “People are going to steal your shit if they want to badly enough” does not mean theft shouldn’t be a crime.

There’s probably a few other things that can be done but that’s generally correct. Frankly, the solution to gun violence is to remove all guns. Make the situation impossible. That won’t happen and neither will appropriate legal restrictions to ownership with the country the way it is, so training and other preventive measures are the next best thing.

It literally says on the package that Starburst has artificial flavoring. Show me the same on the Starbucks cup.

Falling Down is basically what happens when you mix cocaine with the specific type of male fragility that can afford cocaine.

TIL I can edit post titles on Lemmy. This should prevent some pretty annoying and pointless arguments.

Literally in the second paragraph of the article and the summary at the top of this post.

But as he partied with Los Angeles’ superstars and traveled the country for conventions, he also found he could use his fame to strike up conversations and develop relationships with young fans, including some who were underage.

The article then goes on to discuss his conversations with underage fans. The article uses “young” because his conversations with of-age but teenaged fans were also bad.

I’m not sharing it to discuss it. I’m sharing it to share the information contained within it and it’s worth reading in its entirety. The discussion is a byproduct of the forum on which I share it.

The news is accessible, just not for free. Doesn’t stop it being good original reporting that should be shared. NYT does provide a limited number of free articles per month. If we only read and share free articles, then we’d miss out on a lot of very solid reporting or even miss the point of the reporting.

For example, earlier this month someone shared a free article that analyzed the NYT’s reporting on near-miss aircraft collisions at airports. Most people dismissed the article since the planes were missing by pretty large margins, but that’s because the actual story reported in the original article concerned overworked and understaffed air traffic controllers. The planes coming too close to each other is a byproduct of that, but that’s what people on Lemmy focused on because the secondary, free source, chose to focus on that more sensational topic.

I mean, data visualizations are important and personally I think they contribute to the article by showing aquifer depletion over time, but do you.

Also, I’ve never really appreciated the incessant need to whine about paywalls [edit: sorry, not directly addressed to you, I know you just provided a link]. Journalists and editors shouldn’t have to work for free or depend solely on ad revenue. I understand if you can’t afford it, but journalism is a job that already doesn’t pay very well. I assume you’d also like to get paid for your work.

Yeah but Space Marines though.