• 1 Post
  • 62 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle







  • Oh, I absolutely understand that a lot of tracking is stil possible. But in practice, it’s usually handled by third parties via a script loaded from a third party domain, because doing any of the smarter stuff would require a) a competent IT team b) the marketing team talking to them constantly.

    Much easier to just slap another tracker into Google Tag Manager.

    Of course this doesn’t help against tech companies. YouTube, Facebook, Reddit etc. will most likely track your views based on the requests, which you can’t avoid. But this takes care of 90% of the tracking, and most importantly, it removes the “everyone tracking you across every site you visit” aspect of the ad surveillance industry.




  • 20% of their revenue comes from the EU, almost all of it from ads. I’d argue that complying with the law would cost them more than a quarter of the EU ads revenue, without affecting their costs much -> that’d be 5% of global revenue. Breaking the law still pays.

    Also, how do you conclude that 448 million people paying 90 EUR per year, for a total of 40 billion EUR, wouldn’t offset a 4.66 billion USD fine?

    If the fine was 4% of global revenue every month, sure. So far it looks like it’d be every 3-5 years though…


  • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.detoPrivacy@lemmy.ml***
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Just seeing the renaming bullshit they pulled off (really? renaming an existing project AND renaming a different thing to the old name?!?) is enough to avoid both projects. Anyone who creates confusion like that will also make other unsound decisions.





  • It works well enough to be shown for a few seconds at a keynote for static pictures in some cases. It won’t yet work well enough to be permanently known as the official “remastered version” for moving video consistently.

    Now, someone uploading a watchable version on YouTube? That will happen in the next years if it hasn’t already. But that version would be widely ridiculed if released officially because something, somewhere will be off and fans will notice.


  • As harsh as it is, the color aspect definitely plays into it, but part of it is also expectations. Israel is expected be a developed place that’s at peace and not committing genocide. “Country X in Africa is in a state of {war, civil war, Warlord war, genocide, famine}” happens so frequently that it feels like “county X in Africa is currently stable and prosperous” would be newsworthy. That’s probably not reality, but that’s common perception, I think.




  • Countries with resources won’t have a reason to “devolve into war”. Countries without resources won’t affect much beyond that country. Why would logistics get disrupted?

    I also think you’re overestimating the effect. Optimistic studies claim something like 8% impact in 2100, pessimistic 18% in 2050, which is a tiny effect per year.

    Again, humanity deals well with slow changes. We’re mostly talking about “the economy grows by one percentage-point less quickly than it would without climate change” for the worst affected countries in the absolutely worst long term estimates (something like -65% by 2100), and a fraction of that for most countries. Just to be clear, we’re not talking about “x% less than now”, we’re talking about “x% less than it would have been without climate change”. It’s likely that over time, despite climate change, the standard of living even in those countries will continue to increase, unless they, as you said, devolve into (internal/local) wars for mostly unrelated reasons.