Corvos
3hr ago
What I'm saying is that if you run deep-cover agents to try and find out what terrorists are doing before they pull off something really big, then this is going to happen. Maybe you disapprove of deep-cover in general, maybe you don't think it was worth it in this case. But the IRA were emphatically responsible for the murders that they ordered their (assumed) minions to carry out and for the need to find out who was going to get murdered and bombed next.
Corvos
3hr ago
I don't disagree, and actually I was thinking 'those look weirdly familiar' before I realised that's how Android and iOS do their package urls. I just think that enough infrastructure was in place that people weren't willing to rework things to satisfy us anal-retentives :)
Corvos
4hr ago
an emancipated independent woman who can stand up to the world
It would not be the first time that parents raised their children in a way that sounds like it will make them happy but actually won’t.
Corvos
4hr ago
I imagine because the practice of selling domains as domain.com came in long before people used subdomains.
Corvos
5hr ago
I slap a popup on my streaming site that directs you to buy shit, guess what, now it's a site for selling shit to you.
Or you could respect your customers and provide them services they like in exchange for money? Once upon a time, Americans were into that.
Corvos
11hr ago
That link describes the activities of a British deep-cover agent in the IRA. He was there because it was important to know what the IRA was doing, and he did awful things because the IRA ordered him to.
In the nicest possible way, from the British side, 'taking responsibility for [English] history' always seems to mean 'take the blame for all the stupid stuff we did to each other and you should have magically stopped'. It's the same with the Benghal famine, a natural famine that occured in Bangladesh (and occurs again and again with monotonous regularity Empire or no Empire) but which we get it in the neck for because we didn't magically teleport food we didn't have past a blockade of U-boats.
The convention is that it's www.subnet.host.com. So you might have maps.google.com or auth.google.com or search.alphabet.com. If Amazon is acting as a large supercorp providing many services, and Twitch is a provider of streaming, then people on twitch.amazon.com or amazon.twitch.com are on that site for streaming. If they were there to be sold things they would be on shopping.amazon.com or the reverse.
(In today's internet you pay for the xxx.com domain name, but you can subdivide that domain into as many yyy.xxx.com subnets as you want. Doing it the other way round would be incredibly expensive.)
If Twitch and Amazon are both big messy things full of subsidiaries and you are advertising everything everywhere then you are in the realm of 'play stupid games, win stupid prizes' and you should fix your org chart.
even though you've opted into a Twitch stream you didn't intend to opt into the Amazon store
That's how. Like, Amazon and Twitch are separate brands and people use them for separate things, and everybody with eyes can see that. It's not a grand political dilemma like the Minneapolis car incident.
The 'safe zone' is 'you make cola and you advertise your own cola'. The bad zone is 'you run an advertising agency'. 'you make cola but you advertise life insurance from your life insurance subsidiary' is well within 'here be dragons' and you're risking serious issues. It's like when you threaten massive fines for disinformation and everyone bans anything that could even possibly look like something government might consider disinfo. You don't actually have to tolerate autistic winkling out of loopholes.
How do you make it stronger without accidentally crushing normal people just trying to honestly sell things?
Could you give some examples? My model of the world is broadly 'if people want what you are trying to sell, they will go looking for it'. If people buy something and they like it, they tell their friends or they write reviews (I am okay with free samples to review sites etc.). But the idea that 'no, you don't know you want this yet' is IMO a lie that advertisers and salesmen tell themselves and deserves very short thrift.
this is the Britain option, where you just import young foreigners to make up the workforce and accept that your country isn't going to be the descendant of what it used to be in a generation or two
Note that Britain doesn't have a thriving economy, because flooding your country with people and assuming that they will magically fix the economy because GDP=economy is stupid and most politicians and civil servants couldn't touch grass in a garden center.
It's comedy but this fictional game show portrays the feeling of trying to be honest in Britain quite well: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ksBrraaVAxQ
Corvos
14hr ago
The spirit of the law is clear, but you can't enforce the spirit of the law. You can only enforce the letter, and anything where a company is allowed to do their own advertising on their own platforms just encourages consolidation and rewards megacorps at the expense of all the small people. I suspect that if you try to add epicycles to close these loopholes then the megacorps will pay thousands of dollars to clever people who will work harder than the 5 minutes I spent here and find cleverer loopholes.
This seems unnecessarily defeatist. The law is ultimately semi-formalised human judgements, and humans are perfectly capable of making judgements without rigid rubrics. You just need a 'safe zone' of examples that are fine, a 'lawless zone' of examples that are not fine, and a 'here be dragons' zone in between. The reason that megacorps frolic so happily is that lawyers are too lawyer-brained to actually apply the spirit of the law when working out loopholes in the letter of it is so much more fun and rewarding, and because governments don't actually want to apply it. When they do want to apply it, suddenly the corps fall in line.
Corvos
1d ago
The theoretical American commitment to liberty makes them unable to say 'we want to reward patriotic and pro-social behaviour' so they end up finding weird and awful metrics for it.
Corvos
1d ago
My understanding (perhaps wrong) is that Tony Abbott basically forced through hardline illegal immigration restrictions against huge protests from both sides of the isle right before immigration massively ramped up due to easy travel. The problem is that the numbers are so big in other countries, and the use of migrants so structural, that getting from America’s ‘default yes’ to Australia’s ‘default no’ is extremely difficult. Though IMO Trump should definitely do this.
I can see that, and would probably agree with you if I had read any of his books after age 12 or so. I think that if you are mature enough to consider the morality involved, or its sociological implications, you are too old for the books. Dahl was so successful because he had the mind of a kid, and he famously didn't get on with adults.
Corvos
1d ago
Dahl’s stuff is popular with 10 year old kids because it’s irreverent of the pieties of adulthood (though fifty years out of date now). The fact that you wouldn’t read it to your child is part of the appeal.
Corvos
1d ago
Part of it I suspect is that everyone knows the government will never, ever voluntarily give up revenue and control, so it's more a question of 'would you like at least some of the money the government steals to come back to you'? Especially since they're the only things that aren't means-tested.
If so, the fact that the left now fulminates on pseudo-anonymous tumblr rather than spreading open anti-white, anti-male material on their employer's official blog and Slack channel would be more of a win for the Trumpian right than anything else IMO.
I also think that left-wing whites have an entirely unjustified confidence in their own future. Demographics are what they are. One day, as usual, the left will look at the ‘utopia’ they memed into existence and realise that it has no place for them.
Corvos
2d ago
There’s a bunch of Japanese words that will not stick. I’d list some but I don’t remember them…
Corvos
2d ago
Just off the top of my head Shakespeare / Wuthering Heights / Jane Austen / Tolkein / Dickens esp. A Christmas Carol / arguably Kipling / Lovecraft.
Yes, there's a fierce winnowing process, in part because public attention is a limited resource. But look at Lovecraft, for example. Lovecraftian horror became a genre, there are lots of parodies and cutesy anime Narth???tep and Lovecraft-lite stuff, and the racial elements are toned way down, but broadly there are works which play it straight released every year and the genre is in rude health precisely because works are still being released which respect its spirit.
(Reminds me that I want to play Still Wakes the Deep).
Corvos
3d ago
Art isn't like people, it doesn't have a fixed expiry date of seven-score years and ten. The difference between rejuvenation and 'using the rotten corpse as a finger-puppet' is whether it holds true to the original spirit and people still like it. Politics is very relevant to that.
Corvos
4d ago
No babe i follow her because it's Christlike to befriend prostitutes. Her too. Yeah and her
I see you too are a devotee of William Gladstone.
Contrary to popular opinion, the government is not required to indulge iamverysmart people who think they’ve found a clever loophole. As ‘sovereign citizens’ find out every day. Unless you have a very peculiar and sure to unpopular UI, people on your site are either streaming or shopping, they are not doing so simultaneously.
Truly, a tragedy. If people aren’t prepared to pay for it, why preserve it?
More options
Context Copy link