I am struck by how incredibly mild the accusation resulting in Fiedler's removal was, and reminded of the saying: If you let the front line collapse, then you get to be the front line.
One way to look at it that makes it clear CVS was deceptive: Nothing on the checkout screen donation message implied that a donation made there would differ from one made through other channels.
That ADA agreed to the terms does not make them any less deceptive.
> Others are even less misinformative; there are lots of articles about members of some group Infowars doesn’t like committing a crime or doing an offensive thing; usually other sources confirm that these crimes or offenses are real.
Thankfully established media would never sink so low as to resort to cherry-picking anecdotal events.
Not sure what you are saying, have you read the article further? It also says that what you call 'established media' uses the same strategy. Either way, i think Scott renders a good argument overall, as usual, and I don't really see how your point invalidates any of it.
Nothing to see here, move along. Key positions in social media companies filled with ex-spies and police is no different than a high-school chemistry teacher going to work for a glue manufacturer.
Evidence of editorial and policy decisions subtly favoring US government agendas? No, there will always be plausible deniability that someone willing to play as dumb as you will interpret as innocence and impartiality.
And if I may be more direct for a moment, perhaps other Americans will play along with your charade, but those of us in other countries won't be as willing to turn a blind eye to "ex" foreign (to us) intelligence agents meddling with communication platforms, just as you would not be so placid if it were ex-FSB agents instead of your people.
For those few deliberately obtuse souls that need evidence the fox may have ulterior motives for guarding the hen house:
In response to a 2017 request from the Pentagon, Twitter kept online a network of accounts that the U.S. military used to advance its interests in the Middle East, according to internal company emails that were made public on Tuesday by The Intercept, a nonprofit publication.
Unpaid? Did they not share household income/expenses, and in case of divorce, were entitled to part (half, I believe) of their ex-husband's wealth? In addition to child-support.
A compensation plan of "room and board + a cheque upon termination" would be considered a form of slavery in most of the first world. Purchasing decisions in single-income families are usually ultimately decided by the person with income, aren't they?
Yes, your wildly misleading characterization of marriage does sound bad. But here in the real world (at least the West, unlikely it applies to the Middle East), "Women drive 70-80 percent of all consumer purchasing, through a combination of their buying power and influence." [1]
By the way, nice rhetorical trick of reducing half of all of one's wealth, plus child support and/or alimony to "a cheque".
Also NPR: Saying the BLM protests involved riots or looting is "misleading", because most of them were peaceful [1].
(570 riots over the course of 3 months breaks down to 190 riots a month. That’s 47 riots a week or 7 riots a day. See if they are so willing to ignore violence of a cause they dislike.)
Also also NPR regarding the Hunter Biden laptop: We don't want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don't want to waste our listeners' and readers' time on stories that are just pure distractions [2]
Unlike the Pence statement on riots, which did rise to the level of significance that NPR considers worthy of reporting. So forgive me if I take their word on anything with a grain of salt.
That article doesn't mention 570 riots, it mentions "570 (demonstrations, out of 10,600) involved protesters engaged in violence," and clearly not every instance in which at least a single protestor engaged in violence is a riot. And the source for the claim that most demonstrations were peaceful wasn't NPR but US Crisis Monitor, linked here[0], where you can clearly tell from the data that, yes, the vast majority were peaceful. And your claim of "7 riots a day" is such an obvious bad faith manipulation that I'm actually insulted you expect it to be taken seriously.
If you're going to purposely misrepresent a source to that degree, you shouldn't link to the evidence that easily exposes your falsehoods. I know you didn't put a lot of effort in but at least respect the effort you did put in.
Bill Gates isn't doing good - the money he stole [1] from us is doing good. And he didn't have a change of heart - he hasn't opposed any of the IP maximalist, pro-corporate lobbying that helped MS grow so wealthy. Do you see him calling to end software patents?
I can forgive the stolen money, even credit him for how he's using his loot [2], but he hasn't lifted a finger to undo the damage he did to software freedom - our freedom. Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity.
[1] Acquired by underhanded means through the mentioned anti-competitive and lock-in practices.
> Objectively, that makes him hostile to any non-corporate entity.
You can't just put the word "objectively" at the beginning of something and make it objective. He's not hostile to those kids in Africa who don't care about software freedom but are not dead because they didn't get malaria.
I get that we're on HN, but this idea that the good of software is somehow the most important good is just lunacy. I genuinely cannot fathom how anyone can see stopping software patents as more important (or even remotely close to the same level of importance) than stopping malaria.
But it's not just the good of software, because software is eating the world. Software is in your phone, in the tractor that grows your food, in the gene sequencing machine (and gene sequencing software) used to fight disease, in self-driving cars, and in non-self-driving ones too. And you can bet there will be software in automatic weed killing robots.
It's how you access your bank, the news, even government services. It's how you find a date, a taxi, how you order food. It. Is. Everywhere.
On net, if you were at risk of malaria, he is not hostile. But to the average global citizen, and especially their descendants in the future, he is hostile. Because the line between software freedom, and just freedom, is vanishing, and fast.
Some utilitarians might argue that it is morally right to redistribute money and effort in software in rich countries and rich corp software licences, to developing low-hanging innovation, institutions, policy, and advocacy that improves lives where the dollar can be stretched best, Gates' legacy be damned.
What? Bill Gates is a fine person. I know this because the decades long multi mullion dollar influence campaign to make me think this has been working to perfection!
Another small step to make people even more rootless. How can local communities form, when what used to be inter-generational homes become as transient as a hamburger? Our only links to society will be through corporations and government.
But as usual, our sick society looks at it through an exclusively financial lens.
> It’s safe to say the investment was amply repaid: by the end of 2021, the EU had signed €71 billion worth of confidential contracts, securing up to 4.6 billion doses of vaccines (more than ten doses for each European citizen).
It was a thousand small steps that led to this.