Banning an entire class of ads online and in media during peak hours? Sounds like a win to me, even if it doesn’t have the effect they hope for.

Ads suck, especially ads that are selling garbage no one needs. The fewer, the better.

The script I used also edited my comments prior to deletion, but it apparently didn’t hit my older posts on the edits either.

They may have tried. Most of the services used to wipe posts and comments were ineffective on content more than a couple years old because Reddit wouldn’t report that the content existed.

I couldn’t verify this directly either, but I know some users had also claimed that, after Reddit started catching on to what people were doing, they’d keep the content anyways, un-edited, and just hide it from view on your account so you wouldn’t know it was still there unless you went back to find the original posts, which most people wouldn’t know where to find.

During the whole debacle, I wiped my content but kept my account in the hopes that they’d backtrack on their decisions. Shortly after joining Lemmy, I googled a question on Reddit and saw that I had an inbox message, someone replying to a comment that I had made years before which, surprise, was not deleted. Clicking on my comment history on my profile showed nothing, but the message was still there in the thread under my name.

Sadly no, your Steam account can be closed at any time and you have no recourse to access your purchased content if that happens. Likewise, Steam can suspend service and you lose access to your content as well.

But that’s not just a Steam thing, it’s digital media as a whole. Even a physical disc is not ownership, it’s just a license to access the content it contains.

Let me know if you find any favorites, I am down for anything easy and quick if they’re out there (as long as it’s not more rice and beans).

I gave being vegan a go but stopped because I couldn’t keep up with it.

Working 60-hour weeks makes it hard to meal prep, so I order out a lot, and there aren’t many vegan friendly dining options in my area.

I ended up skipping a lot of family gatherings because Cantonese food isn’t all that vegan friendly. The one thing I never wanted to be was “that guy” who needed a special menu when invited to social events, so I thought it was easier to just withdraw. Being very lactose intolerant as a kid did not help in that regard when friends would want to go out for ice cream or eat birthday cake and I’d always feel like “that guy”.

At a particularly low point for me, when I was eating the same garden salad for dinner for 2 weeks straight, I ended up having a bit of a breakdown. My therapist said that it is admirable to be vegan, but my behavior at the time was verging on having a martyr complex, and that I should stop punishing myself to make a point.

I’m currently a pescatarian, which is the only concession I could make at present to let myself eat my family’s home-cooked meals that are usually made with a fish sauce of some sort. I’d like to try going vegan again at some point when I’m in a better mental space, but it’s something that some of us have to find our way into gradually.

I like and admire vegans.

I probably should be vegan because I am lucky enough to have the economic privilege to support that kind of lifestyle.

But, as with many other communities centered around lifestyle topics, I would never want to participate in a vegan community. Lifestyle communities always become insular and echo-chambery, so you become a pariah if you don’t properly adhere to 100% of the community consensus behaviors.

Not just vegans, but you see it happen with fitness communities, diy/home decor, a lot of hobbies, etc.

Yeah it’s against the law to drink alcohol openly in public in most of the US, but nothing is out of the ordinary if someone’s just chugging a bottle of ranch.

You’re always used to seeing yourself in the mirror where everything is backwards and don’t see yourself the same way others see you.

Agreed. As much as I hate the commodification of pride, I’d rather live in a world where corporations are financially incentivised to pay lip service to LGBT rights and issues than financially disincentivised.

Not likely, the production lines used to service other countries are probably not the same used to supply the US.

New equipment would have to be obtained, new processes developed based on differences with regional suppliers, different regulatory standards on the production process would have to be adhered to, and they’d lose out on the generations of compatibility with older standards that they are intent keeping as cost saving measures.

Overnight is a stretch, but could they switch given enough time? Almost certainly. But it’s a major unnecessary expense that doesn’t immediately benefit shareholders.

90’s-00’s in Massachusetts

All I can say is that the metric system was predominantly taught in my American school experience, with US units mainly limited to math class. The only thing that sucked about using metric in science class is the short unit we had where we needed to convert measurements between metric and US, which I think was arguably the point.

It’s corporations, really, that seem to insist on having their products and tools still defaulting to US customary units, and I can’t fathom why. Even when you go abroad and try to buy a TV, they’re all still labeled in inches, which boggles my mind.

Excluding laws in certain places meant to protect children from a life of ridicule, you can name your child whatever you want.

The issue of trademark, which is what this article highlights, only concerns applications where there is a business conflict. For example, it is normal for an actor/musician/artist to trademark their name as their “brand,” which means I can’t just form a thrash metal band called “Taylor Swift” to profit off of some confused music listeners. And even if my legal name was Taylor Swift, I could still be required to change my “stage name” to something else when promoting myself as an artist to avoid any confusion/conflict with Tay-Tay.

Last I checked, Warner Bros is not in the passport industry, so this is a dumb argument that should never have occurred. If I had to guess, it was probably just some random disgruntled government employee who felt the need to play armchair activist and “punish” a parent because they didn’t like the name they chose for their child.

Sure, though I guess I’m wondering what angle you’re coming from, then.

Not to say this was your intention, but a lot of people try to “justify” the fact that many of the founding fathers owned slaves, even when it is seen as reprehensible today, as a product of contemporary values. My main point is that slavery was viewed just as negatively then as it is today by everyone except the slaveowner class, of which Washington was a member. But because Washington is frequently positioned as some kind of pseudo-mythology figure representing pure American values (e.g. this post), I often see a lot of mental gymnastics used to explain why he still had slaves, often citing his decision to free his slaves in his will and signing some anti-slavery measures passed in congress as indicators that, deep down inside, he really opposed slavery all along. Yet he still lived and died a slaveowner.

So I just needed to clarify my point, namely that slavery was seen as unethical then as it is today. Washington became president in 1789, but even prior to that, slavery was a hotly debated topic at the 1787 constitutional congress, during which time the US was already dividing itself into slave states and free states. That’s when we see things like the three-fifths compromise, where southern slave states attempted to use their slave populations to gain more representation in government over the more populous free states. When a state has to leverage its own population of enslaved people to preserve their power against the growing abolitionist movement, it’s inexcusable. If Washington recognized that but still decided that he was fine with using his hundreds of slaves to reinforce Virginia’s economic power and representation in government, he should be seen as a coward more than a role model.

I’m inclined to disagree with this take if only for the fact that many of Washington’s contemporaries recognized that slavery was immoral, and the topic of abolition was one of the earliest controversies in the US before Washington was even president.

Just because everyone in power is doing evil, heinous things does not excuse the evil, heinous things. If you want to make the argument that it was normalized, that’s one thing, but the slaveowners of that day knew what they were doing and deserve condemnation because of it.

Reminder that George Washington owned slaves and saw nothing wrong with that.

So just unfunny casual racism, then.

Because even though they feel the need to seek physical intimacy from someone else, they still want the stability and safety a relationship brings.

Oh 100%. One of the many ways corporations try to pull money out of your wallet when you’re not looking.

In these sorts of situations, I’ve sometimes made use of a temporary card using services like privacy.com. Lets you sign up for free trials that require cards without giving them any real card details. That way, if you happen to forget to remove the subscription (or if they are so draconian they make it nearly impossible to do so) the transaction fails to process when they try to charge you.

Sometimes even banks provide temporary/virtual card services for their members, too.