Ah yes the governor should not work with Trump to get national problems fixed he should personally look at a single incident.
Readit NewsGuvante commented on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down pcgamer.com/games/masterc... · Posted by u/croes
Guvante commented on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down pcgamer.com/games/masterc... · Posted by u/croes
You have them reversed. Are the far right the ones wanting to censor Musk, Trump and everyone else they don't like?
Again censorship means something and "I don't like these people we shouldn't listen to them" is not censorship.
Musk has only had negative feelings except possibly some fringe thoughts (I have never heard a call for government censorship of Musk).
Trump was only asked to be censored when he was assisting a coup. Again not liking and not wanting people to listen is not censorship.
Guvante commented on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down pcgamer.com/games/masterc... · Posted by u/croes
No, the far right are the ones dismantling federal agencies like the EPA, the FDA, USAID etc., sending the army to police states they don't like, firing the person responsible for jobs statistics because they don't like the numbers, slapping 50% tarrifs on countries because they dared to prosecute one of Trump's buddies etc. (just some of the latest examples).
The "far left" (as the far right likes to call anyone who doesn't agree with them) are those who don't like the above and are protesting against it...
I am simply rephrasing the person I responded to and noting the difference in the meaning of the word "censorship".
Aka in once case it is censorship in another it is just people complaining which isn't censorship.
Guvante commented on Mastercard deflects blame for NSFW games being taken down pcgamer.com/games/masterc... · Posted by u/croes
Far right is calling for the government to block access to certain things they don't like aka censorship.
Far left is critiquing those who don't virtue signal enough. That isn't censorship at all.
I will never understand why businesspeople consider it a betrayal when business happens.
If it’s not in the contract, it’s not something you should rely on.
Who says it wasn't in the contract? If they had a terms of service that promised to never sell and then revised it to remove that clause is that legal? Probably not but good luck fighting it.
The problem is legal suits over complex contract law are way too expensive for impacted people to legitimately seek enforcement in cases like this. Especially since courts hate non-monetary enforcement and so at best would allow some pittance of money as a replacement.
Just look at what private equity did to British Water companies, Toy'R'Us and any number of other organizations. Do private equity companies perform any useful social purpose? Or are they all wreckers, asset strippers and carpet baggers?
Private equity can sometimes save failing businesses unfortunately there aren't a lot of businesses that go public out of private equity so it is difficult to measure their effectiveness.
Since after all the only time private equity is interested in going public is unicorns.
There is openstreetmaps of course and osmand as a navigation app. There is also a biking specific project related to openstreetmaps. None of it is as polished as komoot of course. Far from it. This sell-out was totally predictable. Why the outrage? Do people never learn? It's so frustrating.
I think it is fair to be annoyed that crowd sourcing is used to enrich a select few.
Honestly the best course of action is to let it die. $300M is enough money that losing the user base would be enough for similar things to stop happening.
Other than entirely community-driven projects (like https://wanderer.to/ mentioned in the article), are there company "forms" that legally protect against this kind of sell-out? Like non-profit or public-benefit-corporation?
If users are contributing the content of the app, it seems they should have a way to hold the owners accountable.
Honestly it can be quite difficult, generally speaking the best you can do is release the data in raw machine readable format with a permissive license.
Unless you already have large interested parties "bribing" (not technically of course) the group of controlling members tends to be a weakness of anything crowd sourced.
Especially since it is rarely cut and dry. If the finances aren't working out is it better to sell and keep the site online or not? Are intrusive pop ups begging for donations a better option? There isn't a singular true best option.
Deleted Comment
That's the intent, but it's going to result in some lean months or years until the payola is delivered or the factories are (re)built. And it's not going to be a fun time for Walmart.
Given generally speaking imports and exports tend to be distinct products we would need to add 118% goods production to not need to import.
The US isn't capable of doing that in even a decade.
And it is going to impact everything because unlike most tariffs which exclude manufacturing goods this set hits everything so you cannot competitively produce things unless the entire production chain from raw materials is in the US.