• 9 Posts
  • 170 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • I would agree that Americans need to make “informed decisions” in the upcoming election - for instance, they need to be “informed” of the fact that one of the candidates is a convicted felon.

    And on another note, here’s that “politically motivated” thing again.

    Just as I noted the other day, when Alito trotted it out, how is there even a notion that it matters?

    Let’s just run with the assumption that the prosecution was “politically motivated.” So what? The trial worked exactly the way a trial is meant to work - the jury heard the evidence and rendered a verdict based on the evidence.

    What on earth does the supposed motivation of the prosecutor have to do with anything?








  • The whole “politically motivated” complaint is such a brazenly dishonest diversion that it just astonishes me that people use it, much less get away with it.

    Alito told a filmmaker posing as a conservative activist that ProPublica “gets a lot of money” to dig up “any little thing they can find,” suggesting the reporting was politically motivated.

    How does that even matter?

    The simple fact of the matter is that, whatever their motivations might be, people either are or are not going to find evidence of corruption, and the one and only thing that determines that is whether or not such evidence exists.

    Alito, were he so inclined, could’ve very easily have made it so that nobody, no matter how determined or for what reason, could’ve uncovered evidence of his corruption. All he had to do was not be corrupt.

    If there was no corruption there could be no evidence of corruption, and then even the most sinister and underhanded attempt to make him look bad would fail.

    On the other hand, if there is evidence there to be found, then the motivations of the people who uncover it are entirely irrelevant - the ONLY thing that matters is what they uncovered.

    Seriously, how does the assertion that something like this is “politically motivated” even have the illusion of credence? How is it met with anything other than a blank look and a “So what?”





  • It’s so incredibly obvious that that would happen that I sincerely believe that that’s part of the intent.

    Not to mention that all of this noise about flavored vape juice being some sort of underhanded scheme to rope in kids is one of the most ridiculously dumbass things that I’ve ever seen gibbering idiots apparently sincerely claim to believe. Well - this side of Qanon at least…

    When I started vaping, premixed juice was the exception rather than the rule. So what you generally bought was nicotine extract, propylene glycol and/or vegetable glycerin, AND FLAVORING. Flavoring it was the standard literally from day one.

    Nicotine juice is flavored and has been flavored all along for two very simple reasons: first and foremost because on its own, it tastes like crap, and second because everybody - not just kids but EVERYBODY - likes for things to taste good.

    I am so fucking tired of assholes and idiots.


  • How thoroughly bizarre.

    Does this guy actually live in a fantasy world in which, to him, the US supplying arms to Ukraine to aid Ukraine in fighting a defensive war in response to a Russian invasion of their country equals American aggression? How does that even work?

    Russia invaded Ukraine.

    It’s just that simple. That’s not an interpretation or an opinion - it’s an undeniable fact.

    Russia invaded Ukraine.

    That’s a clear, obvious, blatant act of aggression. In fact, it could likely be said that, internationally, there is no single thing that’s more clearly an act of aggression than one country invading another one. The exact thing that Russia did.

    So how on Earth does this guy spin that into US aggression?

    Quite seriously, I can only conclude from this that this guy, and whoever else is behind this, is literally insane. That must be the case pretty much no matter what. Either he’s so insane that he genuinely believes that defending a country against a foreign power’s invasion is “aggression,” or he’s so insane that he’ll brazenly (and at great length) lie and claim that that’s what he believes.

    How did it come to this? How is it even possible for literal insanity to be presented as valid political opinion?

    It’s just so… bizarre.



  • Mm… no. It’s really not.

    The specific point of all of this was that Google wanted to avoid a jury trial, and the specific reason that they wanted to avoid a jury trial is because a jury trial is much more likely to end up with a much bigger judgment against them. A judge in a bench trial will follow established precedent to arrive at a reasonable penalty, while a jury can and often will essentially arbitrarily decide that they should be fined eleventy bajillion dollars for being assholes.

    So their goal with this payment was pretty much exactly the same as the goal of the motorist who slips a traffic cop a bribe to get out of a ticket - to entice someone with immediate cash in order to avoid potentially having to pay much more somewhere down the line.






  • I know Cory Doctorow coined the term “enshittification” to refer to a specific dynamic with social media, but what he described is really just a particular example of a more fundamental process that happens to virtually all notably successful companies. And this is a prime example of it.

    In the beginning, the company gains success by offering a quality product that people want at a reasonable price. They actually provide a product or service the people want at terms with which they’ll agree, and thereby succeed, and that’s where the focus is.

    But along the way, they pick up a layer of essentially parasitic executives and shareholders who are paid obscene amounts of money mostly just for having achieved their positions. They bring little if anything of value to the company - they just funnel enormous sums of money into their own and each other’s pockets.

    And then the focus changes. It goes from winning customers through offering the best possible service or product at the best possible price to maximizing revenue with which to pay grotesquely inflated salaries and dividends to a relative few by offering the shittiest possible service or product at the highest possible price, and counting on market share, lack of competition, name recognition and inertia to keep the company going in spite of the fact that it’s now… enshittified.

    And that’s what we’re seeing at Spotify right now.

    See also : Uber, Airbnb, Netflix, Google…