Good job with your shrewd skepticism in support of the narrative!
Daily Telegraph also in on the Chinese conspiracy: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/60-minutes-chinese-spy-liqiang-wang-refused-asylum-in-australia/news-story/d9ee85e40bb4e452088221a09a2e4dfd
Also the judges in Australia behind the news story. Conspiracy goes all the way down.
I thought this story seemed awfully familiar but was like wait didn’t that so-called Chinese spy turn out to be a total fraud?
Turns out that was the last breathless story about a Chinese spy detector from this outlet: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-23/chinese-spy-wang-liqiang-seeks-political-asylum-australia-report/11732174
Turned out to be a fraud but I guess they found a new one to present without questioning or contextualizing with last time: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3206318/chinese-spy-who-claimed-he-undermined-hong-kong-protest-movement-facing-deportation-australia-over
Considering that leaks have come from militaries around the world that aren’t allies, that seems pretty tinfoil hat.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the answer to the question that’s posted all the time on gaming forums of: “Phones are so powerful these days, especially compared to the Switch, why can’t we have real games on phones without microtransactions?”
it’s that at any point a decision can be made which you have no control over
This is true for any software you didn’t write. Plenty of FOSS software has gone in directions I didn’t like.
The only real difference is whether decision makers have a profit motive. That’s important, but that said, it’s not everything.
What poor quality journalism writing.
How can you have a headline like that without addressing what makes the contents of the program unusual and what makes the program controversial?
I see a lot of people online saying this kind of thing, though I gotta wonder if it’s mostly old people who can’t adapt new paradigms.
I would never buy a computer without touch anymore. The thing the ergonomics argument misses is just because you have touch doesn’t mean you can’t use a mouse (or touchpad) also when it makes more sense. Tiredness is never an issue for me.
There are some things that are just infinitely more natural with touch, using an electronic device that lacks touch just feels like using incredibly outdated technology to me now.
Your phone keyboard statistical engine is not a very insightful comparison to the neural networks that power LLMs. They’re not the same technology at all and just share the barest minimum superficial similarities.
I hate the cynical nihilism around here so much. It plays into the Republican and big business hands so well it might as well be propaganda.
We had net neutrality before under the Democrats. The Republicans got rid of it when they took power.
Bothsidesism is juvenile bullshit.
Wouldn’t this justify vandalizing any type of machine whatsoever? Get in an elevator and nobody is looking? Stab the control panel so they have to get a human in the future making the elevator. See a car and no one is looking? Set it on fire so they have to use a human pulled rickshaw instead.
Wow that seems like a strange permission to have as default. It doesn’t seem like very many apps have a legitimate need for listing other installed apps unless I’m missing something.
How are they managing to do this? Surely it requires a permission in Android to access the list of installed apps, right?
I recall Dorsey publicly coming out in support of Elon’s Twitter well after the sale. Maybe there was no ethical conflict for Dorsey and he likes what he sees.
Yeah, maybe all of this wouldn’t have happened if the equity was split among the employees.
This is an astonishingly well written, nuanced, and level headed response. Really on a level I’m not used to seeing on this platform.
I don’t think waving away being a Luddite just by saying so makes it so.
I can’t think of a single angle of principled moral theory that makes this okay. Vandalizing or stealing someone else’s property they paid for. Hurting both the restaurant and the customer by depriving them of their food. Holding back progress on an invention that can reduce the need for humans to engage in a type of work that is hard, dangerous at times, and low paid.
From a purely rational on paper view, it doesn’t look terribly different than saying vandalizing or stealing from delivery vehicles driven by people isn’t wrong. What possible justification could there be for this view besides Ludditism fuck robots?
Again, just anti consumer bullshit spearheaded by Apple and gargled by Samsung.
Samsung was actually one of the later Android manufacturers to drop it is my recollection.
I used to do this. I thought it was awesome but I was literally the only person I ever knew who did this. It was not a popular thing to do.
It always blows my mind some people actually found Apple’s defense convincing.
The iPhones didn’t inform users when they were throttling because they had an old battery. Apple kept the throttling a secret and coincidentally it helped them upsell new phones to people with old phones. This type of functionality was also unique to Apple, it’s not like this is the only choice they had and an industry practice.
Games haven’t been truly good for a long time
Meanwhile, here I am loving gaming and thinking we’re in a golden age of gaming compared to my youth…
I didn’t link Wikipedia because people like you tend to jump on links to Wikipedia with big brain takes about how the article is probably controlled by whoever their boogeyman is.
Both the articles I linked, SCMP which you dismissed because it has China in its name and Daily Telegraph are from the Wikipedia article references if you care to look.
There is nothing to be skeptical about in terms of my sources. There is at this point no credible evidence he was the high level Chinese defecting spy he was presented as initially (just like they’re presenting this one). At this point, it would be incumbent on anyone claiming he is a high level defecting spy to prove it, because even the Australians realized they were had and gave up on suggesting that. Or maybe not so much had as no longer useful for their purpose of pushing a narrative.