It’s as the case is with everything for these parasites: if it loses them too much money or makes them too little, they avoid it like the plague. It’s cheaper upfront to just run it through an open system.

Multiple things can be true at once.

Fascists don’t just go away if you stop mentioning them; if anything, cancer works best undetected. You have to cut them out at the roots, systemically or otherwise, and that requires being conscious of them.

It’s on a case-by-case basis of course so it wouldn’t be the same for everyone. But generally speaking, Linux isn’t user-friendly (though I’m not saying it isn’t at all) in the sense that everything is guaranteed to be compatible with it and work immediately, whether it be certain peripherals that require extra setup to work correctly or software that was never specifically made to work on Linux. I know that from experience, having had some head-scratcher moments when trying to run an obscure/older game or trying to get certain hardware to run on my Linux machine without it having had compatible firmware out of the box. And I wouldn’t even say that I’m all that unknowledgeable with this sort of thing.

I’m not trying to disparage Linux or anything, but it’s definitely not so black-and-white as it easily working well for everyone all the time. It’s never really accommodated for that unfortunately, especially since there’s no one universal Linux distro with all those sore points snuffed out. Until that’s the case I don’t think it would typically appeal to the average person who only games on the side.

The main appeal of consoles is that you can essentially just plug and play without having to worry too much about extra configuration. As much as I like Linux, it’s generally not a good alternative for console folks who just want to relax and play video games.

Maybe innocent people who aren’t as technically literate as you that also happen to be using Chrome don’t deserve for their rights to be infringed upon? If that’s an unpopular thought then so be it I suppose.

Bitch-boy CEO whining about rival company that epitomizes everything he doesn’t have at every chance he gets, very typical behaviour just carry on

Ah, the chimpanzee method.

It really weirds me out that gratuitous violence as a response to societal injustice is so common on Lemmy, if not across Humanity as a whole. Like let’s say this back-to-basics style of justice comes about in modern society and all the relevant assholes are subjected to it. What then? At least, what would the violence even be in the name of? Retribution? How is that productive in any way?

I realize this is a pretty disproportionate response to a relatively banal comment, but I see sentiments such as this one (either intended as sarcasm or not) so often here that I’m essentially using this as a catch-all spot for my thoughts on it.

I’ll just end this tangent with a quote about this sort of thing from a guy way smarter than me (and I promise I’m not just trying to be pretentious it actually applies.)

Absolute freedom mocks at justice. Absolute justice denies freedom. To be fruitful, the two ideas must find their limits in each other. - My buddy Albert Camus

Tragedy of the commons.

Nintendo can just eat a dick, seriously. I’m gonna pirate their games to my heart’s content, they can throw as many little hissy fits as they want about it.

deleted by creator

It’s not even just private equity, this is more or less the exact strategy Microsoft uses.

It’s crazy how once these companies get big enough, they become a cancer that just slowly self-destructs. Everything that’s going wrong in their business can be blamed solely on them. Just all around gross incompetence in the most absurd, blatant way possible. I really hope that, in the near future, we see the main opinion of Microsoft finally coming around to understanding this redundant company’s pig-brained, slop-obsessed stupidity.

That’s not greed though. I’ll say it again but more explicitly: Greed is not an illness, it’s a kind of behaviour that anyone can exhibit through their actions. It doesn’t matter whether they’re an average person or someone with an anti-social disorder, that applies regardless.

I think one of the fundamental problems is that we treat mental disorders like they’re some sort of specialized set of adjectives. Being unfocused is “ADHD”. Being shy or fixated on a specific topic is “autistic”. Being emotionally charged in a stressful situation is “bipolar”. We do that and it undermines what it’s actually like to have and deal with those conditions every day, and makes people who actually have them seem “crazy” or “creepy” to people who are just ignorant. It really sets the general consensus back hard.

I honestly think the greed will (and should now) be considered a mental illness.

At that point it would just be excusing bad behaviour, would it not? I wouldn’t say putting it on the same level as mental illness is fair, either. People with mental illnesses don’t want to be mentally ill. On the other hand, greed is a trait that directly shows itself in a person’s decisions. You can choose to be greedy, you can’t choose to have, say, arachnophobia.

Save this site, it can display archived versions of paywalled articles

https://www.removepaywall.com/

We’ve lived within anarchist societies for the majority of our existence, there really wasn’t any such thing as a leader in the general sense before agriculture. Anarchism quite literally worked for hundreds of thousands of years. You could even argue that it’s a natural function of our species.

This would be such an extreme warping of reality that it’s essentially impossible to make any assumptions about what it would entail like this. You know the joke about a time traveller moving a rock? Yeah, that times a million.

You mean the YouTube that dumps out AI summaries of the videos you’re on their platform specifically to watch directly? That YouTube?

Surely they aren’t a company composed of two-faced slimeballs like their parent. That would be unheard of.