leoj

As a self proclaimed leftist who has been to many protests, I have never once heard anyone say the word Antifa except for my Maga boss when he thought Antifa was going to come and rob his house after the BLM protests…

as long as the investment mortgages aren’t sub prime 🙃

Isn’t this what jeff Bezos is doing with fractional real estate investment, except evil?

Not pooping on the idea, I would totally toss money towards a fractional mortgage to help someone else get a home, just noting how the upside down universe version of this idea is already out there.

sauc: https://arrived.com/

I did not intend to ever say you can have personalized advertisements without invading someone’s privacy, I’m not sure what I wrote that you interpreted that way, possibly my discussion about how I feel the current ads are not always relevant?

Either way, I stated that advertisers should utilize the content of the website or the content being viewed as a method to advertise, which does not involve invasions of privacy.

Or maybe it was when I said “you don’t need to invade someones privacy to advertise to them”

That is me saying, you can have advertisements that are meant for a specific group, and believe that someone is part of that group based on them visiting a website, without invading their privacy.

Its how newspapers did advertisements, its why magazines existed - to sell ad space for specific interest groups. People also give away data by signing up for websites, interest groups, or ordering things, all data that can be harvested without entering my computer or invading my privacy.

this hits it for me, thank you, I came to the understanding above that I had been painted this exact picture when I was younger, but learned better in college.

I think I was a bit blind to the fact that some people still paint the absurd picture of feminists shown above, I forget how far we still have to go as a species sometimes.

totally agree and this experience does make sense to me, people paint feminists very broadly and stupidly - personal anecdote I remember being blown away in college that being a feminist could simply mean supporting the right for women to vote, have equal pay, ect.

I had heard terms like “feminazi” growing up, so the picture in my mind was more similar to the comic than I think I initially realized when reading it.

Ok this makes sense and is the direction I was heading in at the end there (glad I wasn’t just blindly groping), thank you!!

Yeah I don’t understand that either, but thank you for the explanation!

Ok so further simplifying, Straw man fallacy is per wikipedia, the refuting of an argument by refuting a different argument that is not part of the original context, and failing to recognize the distinction.

So here, people refute feminists by using the stawman of them wanting to blow up the earth / being extremists? I feel like something has to come back to training bras, like societal expectations of underwear for women is the argument, but then the straw man is radical feminism?

Goddamn I really am not getting the humor in this one. I’m not trying to be obtuse or overly PC, I really enjoy comics and just want to understand the humor because it seems really abstract to me.

I’m not sure what I said is conflicting, and I feel like your statement is trying to minimize the point I am making, but thats ok, I believe we will never come to agreement here because I firmly disagree with the disruption of privacy for the sake of advertisement.

You can say my feelings are meaningless, but as this gets more invasive people will seek ways to opt out, which I believe is meaningful, although you can say and feel whatever you want my friend :).

Thanks for the book rec, I’ll look it over!

Right? we need the follow up strip where the dude is now addicted to opioids and is pan handling for “gas money” lol.

which part is the joke? I’m honestly missing the humor in this one, like I get it might be funny because the feminists want her to blow up the world maybe?

Petaaaaaahhh explain the joke?

Edit: is the joke the training portion? Like they are training her?

Yeah I understand that, but I will never support trading privacy so advertisers can generate more revenue, so I will continue to propose non-invasive alternatives and tell people supporting invasive methods that they are wrong.

I mean most of the ads I get are meaningless to me despite being personalized, I feel like a lot of people say the same thing, but maybe I am in the minority here.

Either way, I don’t think you need to invade peoples privacy to advertise to them, but agree to disagree. You’re proposing and supporting a level of capitalism that I find repulsive, profit at all costs, privacy isn’t a cost I want to spend.

Not much to do with them unless you want to photograph something specific, and for photographers/videographers the quality can be a let down unless you spend like 2k+ at least, because you basically are using a flying GoPro (DJIs version, but still not exactly mind blowing photography capabilities there).

Maybe? I think they used to advertise based on the content and expected demographics for the website, which is an alternative method that doesn’t require invasive digital fingering.

Right? Like I remember a day and age when the ads were not obtrusive and awful, I would happily go back to a middle ground with normal sidebar/in video ads.

I mean isn’t there a world where we have unobtrusive adverts that are for products people actually want, and can sustain the reporting?

I think people would use less ad blockers if the ads were not designed / placed in a way that feels almost seizure inducing at times.

Unfortunately I think threads/twitter might be the future as a type of open source reporting, as everytime I hit a pay wall I turn around and leave.

I’m only half of the decision tree, but I really appreciate your kind words of encouragement :) we’re trying, but cautiously.

yeah definitely a meeting point of factors.

also this is global, so I thought there was a strong correlation between agrarian societies, having low or depressed wages, and having lots of kids to help with the farm labor, or because there isn’t much else to do for fun.

This could be a regressive imperialist view, idk, but its what I was always told about the correlation between wages and children, especially on a global scale - would be interested to see this same chart for singular countries, the USA for example.

Other commenter pointed out that typically higher incomes generally come with rights for child bearers… So that also could have something to do with it too.

Anecdotal, but partner and I have put off having children multiple times due to affordability, IE who can take that much time off work and still pay food/rent costs?