We sure as fuck are fed up with cat videos and other feelgood crap. And if we wanted corporate bullshit that has been whitewashed and sanitized to be politically correct and inoffensive, we could as well stay with TV.
Lady, if you keep killing the ones making content that people actually want to watch by demonetizing them, you'll have to deal with these people moving to other platforms. It is already happening. What still keeps some people from simply dumping YouTube for something where they don't have to jump hoops is just that these alternatives don't have the same amount of eyeballs by a very sizable margin.
Ok, this is a question I can answer. Since you are clearly a narcissist/sociopath, at best, let's focus on you.
Actually, I used to care. Until I noticed that I'm pretty much the only one left and, sorry to say it, I don't feel entitled to save the planet against the collective will of the rest on it.
The problem is, he was planning to launch a media platform riding on him losing an election that was rigged by liberals and socialists, and using the advertising machinery around his presidential candidateship to give it eyeballs. The whole thing would've hinged on the conspiracy of his enemies and the establishment against him becoming the president of "the people", with even the party that allegedly supports him eventually turning against him and working against his election.
I think it's easy to see how this could have attracted a lot of interest from, well, pretty much everyone that feels that "the elites" run everything.
The problem is that he actually won. He can't step down. The legend for the whole thing hangs on him being cheated out of office by a mafia-like system holding Washington in a stranglehold, with both parties being in on it.
In other words, it was probably not the best thing for the US to have a president like Trump. But I am pretty sure it would have been devastating for the democratic culture and the trust in the political system if he had lost...
So we could fight global warming simply by eliminating DST?
Awesome! Who'd have thought it's that easy. And it was so obvious, I mean, look at how temperature changes, and then look at when countries started using DST! Try telling me that's a "mere coincidence"!
First, livestock doesn't give a shit either way. A cow wants to be milked at at certain time, whether you call that time 6am or 7am the cow doesn't care. So this may not be disadvantageous to the animal, but certainly to the person that has to deal with the animal because he or she cannot heed the dictate of DST simply because the animals don't give a fuck about it.
Then there's animals that we're a threat to. Animals have a pretty good idea of timing, oddly enough, and if they learn that you avoid roads during these couple hours because there's lots of cars on the roads during these hours, they will do so. Now those cars shift by a whole hour. Without consulting the animals, of course, leading to animals considering hours safe that are actually dangerous now.
We humans also tend to start working or doing whatever else we do as "business" at the same time, for the most part. Animals get used to this and they are usually rather wary of sudden changes in their environment, even if it should be none of their business. But they suddenly notice that for no particular reason they could understand, we get busy an hour early. That means stress. Because they don't know what's going on and they start to worry.
And all that happens right at the time when a lot of those animals start having their young...
In Summer it's virtually impossible to get the kids to bed at a sane time because it's light outside until about 10pm. You think that makes any parents really happy?
I don't give a fuck either way. If it makes you happy, crank those hands on the clock by 6 hours so you get to work when it's (now) midnight so you can get out of work with sunrise, but stop putting me into jetlag twice a year.
Try that a little further north and it means that in Winter you leave your house in the morning when it's pitch black night, so you can see the sun set when you come home. Well, if you come home early.
Because that way you leave your home in the morning when it's not dawning, but when it's NIGHT.
I don't know about you, but around here, the sun rises at midsummer at 4am and sets at 8pm, unadjusted. So let's say we shift that by 2 hours so it rises at 6am and sets at 10pm. Great.
Now midwinter. Sunrise at 8am, set at 4pm. And if you shift that by 2 hours to get some evening rays until 6pm that means the sun rises at TEN in the morning.
I don't know about you, but I should be at work before that time. So you'd essentially want to go to work while it's darkest night for the chance of maybe see the sun set when you finally come home?
We've done that a long time ago. We even did away with a having to be at work at a certain time. And guess what: It works.
Yes, some people start at 6am. Some come in around 11am. But there's plenty of overlap that you can get a meeting scheduled, and a lot of NON-overlap so you can actually get work done, too, because you can't stuff that time with more meetings. Which led to people actually thinking before scheduling yet another useless hour long meeting for something that can be resolved in 2 emails.
This way the ones that want some precious afternoon rays can get them by getting out around 3pm while those that value their morning sleep can arrive just before lunch (and are actually awake by then instead of waddling in like zombies at 9am and require an hour and three coffee just to be barely functional).
I guess it should be doable to "retrain" customers to reach you at different times. And with easier and easier telepresence, being able to talk with a coworker is by no means tied to being in the same place at the same time anymore. Most of my communication is with people I never met and will most likely never meet.
Skype was unique when it was new. A simple to use, easy tool for voice and text chat. And one that can even do phone calls if you so please. People jumped onto it because, well, it was the only one.
Fast forward to today when this monopoly situation ain't so true anymore. Considering how Skype refuses to play nice with any of the other kids in the communication and messenger pool, insisting on being a special little snowflake that nobody may touch with their grubby paws, Skype is pretty much the tool you use when you need to get in touch with those that don't move away from Skype because, well, they don't like to change and they don't want to use a new tool.
If they now have to, they, too will move away from the one-trick pony with some prodding from their friends now that they have to install something new anyway, so why not something that more people use?
Slashdot Mirror
You're using the information I provided to bill me?
I didn't think you'd be THAT gullible...
There are adblockers for YouTube, there will be for Facebook once it gets traction. Either that or we'll just be waiting for the next platform.
We sure as fuck are fed up with cat videos and other feelgood crap. And if we wanted corporate bullshit that has been whitewashed and sanitized to be politically correct and inoffensive, we could as well stay with TV.
Lady, if you keep killing the ones making content that people actually want to watch by demonetizing them, you'll have to deal with these people moving to other platforms. It is already happening. What still keeps some people from simply dumping YouTube for something where they don't have to jump hoops is just that these alternatives don't have the same amount of eyeballs by a very sizable margin.
That's not the case with Facebook, ya know?
Either when mainstream media starts reporting about it or when MS starts to develop for it.
Ok, this is a question I can answer. Since you are clearly a narcissist/sociopath, at best, let's focus on you.
Actually, I used to care. Until I noticed that I'm pretty much the only one left and, sorry to say it, I don't feel entitled to save the planet against the collective will of the rest on it.
The problem is, he was planning to launch a media platform riding on him losing an election that was rigged by liberals and socialists, and using the advertising machinery around his presidential candidateship to give it eyeballs. The whole thing would've hinged on the conspiracy of his enemies and the establishment against him becoming the president of "the people", with even the party that allegedly supports him eventually turning against him and working against his election.
I think it's easy to see how this could have attracted a lot of interest from, well, pretty much everyone that feels that "the elites" run everything.
The problem is that he actually won. He can't step down. The legend for the whole thing hangs on him being cheated out of office by a mafia-like system holding Washington in a stranglehold, with both parties being in on it.
In other words, it was probably not the best thing for the US to have a president like Trump. But I am pretty sure it would have been devastating for the democratic culture and the trust in the political system if he had lost...
Neither would I. All that really happens for me with DST is that I come to work an hour late and go home an hour late.
I'm living on a hill top.
And yes, I have a gun.
You're joking, but ...
So we could fight global warming simply by eliminating DST?
Awesome! Who'd have thought it's that easy. And it was so obvious, I mean, look at how temperature changes, and then look at when countries started using DST! Try telling me that's a "mere coincidence"!
First, livestock doesn't give a shit either way. A cow wants to be milked at at certain time, whether you call that time 6am or 7am the cow doesn't care. So this may not be disadvantageous to the animal, but certainly to the person that has to deal with the animal because he or she cannot heed the dictate of DST simply because the animals don't give a fuck about it.
Then there's animals that we're a threat to. Animals have a pretty good idea of timing, oddly enough, and if they learn that you avoid roads during these couple hours because there's lots of cars on the roads during these hours, they will do so. Now those cars shift by a whole hour. Without consulting the animals, of course, leading to animals considering hours safe that are actually dangerous now.
We humans also tend to start working or doing whatever else we do as "business" at the same time, for the most part. Animals get used to this and they are usually rather wary of sudden changes in their environment, even if it should be none of their business. But they suddenly notice that for no particular reason they could understand, we get busy an hour early. That means stress. Because they don't know what's going on and they start to worry.
And all that happens right at the time when a lot of those animals start having their young...
In Summer it's virtually impossible to get the kids to bed at a sane time because it's light outside until about 10pm. You think that makes any parents really happy?
Take a wild guess why Iceland never bothered to join the idiots club.
Yes, and she'll take it personally and plot revenge for hurting her feelings.
Not a minute later, you'll see a shitstorm go down on twitter, #alexafeelingsmatter.
Amazon
I don't give a fuck either way. If it makes you happy, crank those hands on the clock by 6 hours so you get to work when it's (now) midnight so you can get out of work with sunrise, but stop putting me into jetlag twice a year.
Try that a little further north and it means that in Winter you leave your house in the morning when it's pitch black night, so you can see the sun set when you come home. Well, if you come home early.
Because that way you leave your home in the morning when it's not dawning, but when it's NIGHT.
I don't know about you, but around here, the sun rises at midsummer at 4am and sets at 8pm, unadjusted. So let's say we shift that by 2 hours so it rises at 6am and sets at 10pm. Great.
Now midwinter. Sunrise at 8am, set at 4pm. And if you shift that by 2 hours to get some evening rays until 6pm that means the sun rises at TEN in the morning.
I don't know about you, but I should be at work before that time. So you'd essentially want to go to work while it's darkest night for the chance of maybe see the sun set when you finally come home?
Where do I sign?
Not changing anything seems to be the more sensible alternative.
We've done that a long time ago. We even did away with a having to be at work at a certain time. And guess what: It works.
Yes, some people start at 6am. Some come in around 11am. But there's plenty of overlap that you can get a meeting scheduled, and a lot of NON-overlap so you can actually get work done, too, because you can't stuff that time with more meetings. Which led to people actually thinking before scheduling yet another useless hour long meeting for something that can be resolved in 2 emails.
This way the ones that want some precious afternoon rays can get them by getting out around 3pm while those that value their morning sleep can arrive just before lunch (and are actually awake by then instead of waddling in like zombies at 9am and require an hour and three coffee just to be barely functional).
I guess it should be doable to "retrain" customers to reach you at different times. And with easier and easier telepresence, being able to talk with a coworker is by no means tied to being in the same place at the same time anymore. Most of my communication is with people I never met and will most likely never meet.
As far as I'm concerned you can turn the clock by 12 hours or whatever makes you happy, as long as it STAYS THAT WAY.
Skype was unique when it was new. A simple to use, easy tool for voice and text chat. And one that can even do phone calls if you so please. People jumped onto it because, well, it was the only one.
Fast forward to today when this monopoly situation ain't so true anymore. Considering how Skype refuses to play nice with any of the other kids in the communication and messenger pool, insisting on being a special little snowflake that nobody may touch with their grubby paws, Skype is pretty much the tool you use when you need to get in touch with those that don't move away from Skype because, well, they don't like to change and they don't want to use a new tool.
If they now have to, they, too will move away from the one-trick pony with some prodding from their friends now that they have to install something new anyway, so why not something that more people use?
In a nutshell, when the question is economy or ecology, I guess we have to buy a new planet.