Grumble4681's recent activity
-
Comment on Apple TV+ promotion: $3/month for three months in ~tv
-
Comment on Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault in ~movies
Grumble4681 Link ParentMy answer to this is I'm not going to let someone take away what little enjoyment I can get from things, especially when you consider this is not an isolated incident and the people who play these...I question HOW can anyone enjoy these films knowing what Brand prior to these films. It's not like he's a tax cheat or a thief, the dude was on a 6 year rape and sexual assault spree. How can one enjoy these films knowing what was done and not experience some form of disgust every time Brand is on the screen?
My answer to this is I'm not going to let someone take away what little enjoyment I can get from things, especially when you consider this is not an isolated incident and the people who play these characters have lives and some of those people are shitty people. I don't watch something expecting that everyone in it is an angel. If the expectation is that I can't watch something because someone somewhere in it did bad things, then realistically no one should watch anything ever, because most likely there's someone involved in most films or shows that is a piece of shit, especially when you consider how many people are involved in the production of them.
I can enjoy them because he's not anything but a character on the screen to me. I think of it like this. In a world where AI can generate accurate video depictions of things (like people not having two right feet or such), none of the people in that video exist or are real, they're all fictional creations on a screen. The actor in our real world case is merely a vehicle for portraying a character in a way that we had no means of otherwise producing.
Now there's another problem beyond that which is, money may go into the pockets of the actors who play those characters if you continue to consume that content, but this has several levels to it and a lot of it is just guessing and feeling out what feels right or doesn't. I don't know all of the business levels of who gets paid what whenever I watch something, just like people streaming music on Spotify don't generally know what the artists get paid or anyone else involved in the productions of that music, or if Joe Rogan is getting small slices of every listen to every song you listen to on there.
There's a point where I have some reasonable guesses when significant financial impacts are made from my consumerism and in those cases I will try to factor in ethical concerns surrounding production of that content, but beyond that I'm not going to fool myself into thinking I'm making a difference in what seems like smaller cases while boosting my ego about it and at the same time remaining willfully ignorant of other situations because I happened to not be reading the news when someone else got exposed for doing something bad. Essentially I see it as, if I'm not compiling a list of every single person who has sexual assault allegations, domestic abuse, fraud, cheating, stealing, lying etc., and then using that to influence every decision I make, then I'm simply randomly choosing to apply a standard to things based on what happens to cross my periphery at any given time, which just seems pointless. Granted I know I probably still do that for larger things, like if Russell Brand was making a new movie, I probably would steer away from it as I feel that has a bigger impact than not watching a movie made almost two decades ago.
It's really about balancing what positives I can keep in my own life without contributing negatives outwardly where I can avoid it. It turns out that if you really consider most of your actions thoroughly, there's very little you can do that doesn't contribute negatively to something somewhere.
-
Comment on Thanks to recent US law, Elon Musk and Taylor Swift can now hide details of their private jets in ~transport
Grumble4681 Link ParentYeah I wonder, since many of these people publicize the area they are in at some point when they get there, or the media publicizes, how difficult it will be to identify the tail number for the...Yeah I wonder, since many of these people publicize the area they are in at some point when they get there, or the media publicizes, how difficult it will be to identify the tail number for the plane they use. I recall reading that Taylor Swift rents out her jet or something along those lines so maybe things like that would make it difficult to narrow down.
-
Comment on How come the mods on here keep editing the titles of my post to be exactly what they already were? in ~tildes
Grumble4681 Link ParentThis particular point I would expect that editors, as many have mentioned, are not taking the editing responsibility lightly and would edit only if confident that they knew the original source....But what about cases where its not an exact copy-paste? The majority of everyday newspaper articles is not the original source of the information they're presenting. Oftentimes some press-release, some paper, some much longer article, or multiple different resources will be the original source of the information, and often its not clear which news source was 'first' in reporting something. Also one source may have more or less reused an article of a different source but added/dropped some details and/or presented the same information in a dofferent light, which may well be relevant for a discussion of the topic. There's a lot of room for interpretation here.
This particular point I would expect that editors, as many have mentioned, are not taking the editing responsibility lightly and would edit only if confident that they knew the original source.
Furthermore, if someone has a reason why a non-original source is better than the original source, posting a comment explaining that would likely reduce/eliminate the likelihood that anyone would edit the source if there's a reason stated why that particular source was chosen above others.
In principle I'm all for the collaborative approach, but only if the platform is actually built for it.
I agree that a platform more tailored to the specifics of desired outcomes is ideal, but many of the problems people are mentioning in here are also somewhat addressed or mitigated by changing our understanding of the philosophy of the site and the operations of it. If people expect and understand that edits happen, then that would minimize perception that titles or sources should automatically be associated with the person who submitted it. I realize that is also an idealized expectation much like altering the site design, but I think one of them is something that is in our control as people using the site, whereas site design is not in our control if we're not actively contributing money to pay people to design it or personally typing the code to make the site work that way.
-
Comment on Light Phone III begins shipping on March 27th in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentWell that's pretty disappointing. Thanks for sharing that as it does warrant being more cautious of them considering they're a new company.Well that's pretty disappointing. Thanks for sharing that as it does warrant being more cautious of them considering they're a new company.
-
Comment on Light Phone III begins shipping on March 27th in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentI saw in the comments of a post somewhere on here awhile back a mention of the Minimal Phone. https://minimalcompany.com/products/minimal-phone It's a black and white e-ink display with a physical...I saw in the comments of a post somewhere on here awhile back a mention of the Minimal Phone.
https://minimalcompany.com/products/minimal-phone
It's a black and white e-ink display with a physical keyboard, but otherwise seems to just let you use Android however you want, at least from the FAQ it mentions this:
Can I use 3rd party apps on Minmal?
Yes, Minimal runs on Android, with full access to the Play Store, allowing you to download and use all your essential apps. However, the e-ink display and device optimization are geared towards minimizing unnecessary distractions.
-
Comment on Well this terrifies me: Steve Bannon preparing for a third Donald Trump US presidency in ~society
Grumble4681 Link ParentRight, the constitution is a worthless piece of paper at this point in my eyes. If Trump wants to do anything that is in violation of the constitution, who is actually going to stop him? I have...Right, the constitution is a worthless piece of paper at this point in my eyes. If Trump wants to do anything that is in violation of the constitution, who is actually going to stop him? I have yet to see a solid answer to this. A court telling him not to do things has no teeth. He's already setting the groundwork for this, violating court orders and intentionally flouting the rules and using flimsy justifications as he constantly shifts his actions to be more and more egregious.
What happened after Jan 6th? Nothing. Trump suffered no consequences. What happened after Trump was found guilty of multiple felony counts in New York? Nothing. Trump suffered no consequences. What happened or is going to happen with the Georgia case? Nothing.
The military is full of people who support Trump, and Trump supporters don't care about hypocrisy or the constitution if they see what Trump as doing as positive to certain goals. Whatever police forces may have jurisdiction over any possible rulings aren't going to dare try anything against the President. The federal law enforcement officials surely aren't since he's basically their boss.
I would love to know who is actually going to stop Trump if he decides to run for election again. Look at what happened with the post civil war amendments, he was not withheld from ballots despite inciting an insurrection. Who is going to say that he can't be on the ballot again? In the simplest way possible that they could do this, they could just put a puppet name as President, openly declare that Trump will be the president but on paper someone else is there and Trump is vice president, and the amendment saying that you can't run for more than 2 terms is now worthless because it doesn't specifically cover this. Even if the courts say it's clearly against the intention of the amendment, Trump will argue it isn't and not follow court orders with the justification that it doesn't violate the strict text of the amendment.
And the states that are a lock for Democrats may block Trump from the ballot, though we saw with the insurrection thing none of them did, but all the other states the people who would have that responsibility will either be too afraid to do it or will be Trump supporters.
-
Comment on There are two kinds of credit cards in ~finance
Grumble4681 Link ParentI agree that because it's so ubiquitous for the world to run on credit that people should know about it, but I also don't necessarily find it that surprising people don't understand it because I...The number of people I know who just do not understand credit cards, or didn't get them until super recently (in their 30's) is shockingly high given the world runs on shit like credit checks. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does, and I think that a lack of education in this area is just egregious.
I agree that because it's so ubiquitous for the world to run on credit that people should know about it, but I also don't necessarily find it that surprising people don't understand it because I think it's counter-intuitive on an initial glance level.
Someone is giving you a card that lets you buy things with their money with the expectation that you'll pay them back (with legal recourse fallback if you don't), and they'll also give you 2% back on whatever you purchase and it is absolutely no cost to you at all if you pay them back within a month. Just at an initial glance level, I'd meet that suggestion with such skepticism that it would have to be a scam and anyone pushing it is a scammer. That would trigger the 'if it sounds too good to be true, it is' alarm. On some level I think it's wise that people who don't understand it don't partake in it, but obviously as I recognize how the credit system is and the costs that are incurred by not engaging with it and overall makes it not as wise to ignore it.
Then when you learn that merchants pay a fee for every transaction to accept payment of credit cards and realize merchants are just going to pass those costs along, the cash back is actually a scam except you're somehow getting scammed even more if you don't use a card to get the cash back. Then you also recognize credit card companies are tracking and selling data about your purchases too.
Like many financial systems, they are all very scam-like. The stock market is gambling. Cryptocurrency isn't currency at all but just speculative investment, aka gambling. Social security... Hell monetary systems themselves, why is a dollar today worth less than a dollar 10 years ago? I know why these systems are the way they are and I'm vastly oversimplifying them to make a point, that question about the dollar is rhetorical, not saying there aren't good reasons, I'm saying if you don't understand them, it's not unreasonable to be skeptical of them because they all have scam-like qualities to them. Yet many of these are also valuable tools and services part of modern society and in some ways we'd be worse off without them.
-
Comment on San Francisco jails are packed for the first time in decades in ~society
Grumble4681 Link ParentPresumably to the end of making the environment more pleasant for the people living in the area or traveling through the area that don't like that type of activity occurring there. No that has no...Presumably to the end of making the environment more pleasant for the people living in the area or traveling through the area that don't like that type of activity occurring there. No that has no consideration for the impact on the people who are displaced, but after enough time of a problem not getting resolved a better way, I can see why people would get fed up and just rather the problem be moved somewhere else that is away from them.
-
Comment on There are two kinds of credit cards in ~finance
Grumble4681 Link ParentI read that line as going beyond the markup in prices for accepting cards and more as they are being steered towards services and products with higher markups that cover marketing expenses. So...I read that line as going beyond the markup in prices for accepting cards and more as they are being steered towards services and products with higher markups that cover marketing expenses. So basically the credit card company offers cash back etc. but then also works with different businesses to market deals to these customers. So now you can get travel benefits, hotel stays etc. and these are not as ubiquitous as retailers accepting credit cards so the cost isn't as evenly distributed to all people.
So the transactor may fly Southwest because of some travel benefits with their card, while someone else not influenced by this might explore more avenues for a better deal with a different airline. Southwest may charge more for that flight and thus the transactor could essentially be paying for that benefit they are getting in ways they don't realize.
-
Comment on Why is it so hard engage people about indirect effects? in ~talk
Grumble4681 LinkAre there trivial actions? What makes these actions trivial or how did you determine they were trivial? It came across in your post as though this was an example of a trivial action, since you...I am not dismissing the effects of systemic incentives but there are trivial actions that anyone could do to lessen the likely negative effects that almost no one does.
Are there trivial actions? What makes these actions trivial or how did you determine they were trivial?
The current climate makes it incredibly hard to actually eliminate personal impact but it still easy to minimize it with negligible impact on one's own life. Like in sw development the first 90% take 90% of the time and the other ten procent take the other half of the time.
Getting a minimal computer literacy of being able to navigate an unfamiliar GUI, explore and understand the settings and be able, read the messahes they are getting on the screen and willing to search their problems would make anyone much more resistant to any number of dark patterns, yet there is a tendency to defend tech illiteracy.
It came across in your post as though this was an example of a trivial action, since you followed the part about trivial actions with this. I wouldn't necessarily classify navigating an unfamiliar UI to be trivial. I'd say there's definitely sliding scales of difficulties but it's also very relative to the prior experiences and knowledge the user already has among other factors. I was born in a not poor family so I grew up with a computer, and subsequently I developed computer literacy that I was able to constantly iterate on from a young age. But it would be wrong of me to say that it would be trivial for someone else who was a similar age as me to think they should have the same capabilities when I have no clue what their life experiences were relative to mine.
You also mentioned in some comments some other general examples, like eating less meat or just less consumption in general, which I also don't think are necessarily trivial. Just because something isn't trivial doesn't mean I think people can't do it, people can overcome lots of difficult challenges, but I think it is a misunderstanding to classify these problems as trivial because I don't think it accurately values the effort or energy it may require for some people to address them.
Furthermore, no one can be better at everything. So you are picking things you value, and because you value them you place your effort here so you improve at them and wonder why others don't, but are you so sure that other people don't place value in some things that could be argued to be ethically superior to a position where you may currently be indifferent or unaware? Let's say hypothetically you eat chocolate. Do you get ethically sourced chocolate? Why is less meat consumption where you put your focus and not on where you get your chocolate from? Maybe you do consider your chocolate sourcing, I don't know, I'm just trying to illustrate that it's a certainty that somewhere there is something you will be ignoring because there's not enough time in the day to give all of it energy.
-
Comment on Apple will soon support encrypted RCS messaging with Android users in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentThey did claim they would work with the group maintaining the standard to get it implemented and support it, which I believed, though I didn't expect it to happen as fast as it seems it is. I...They did claim they would work with the group maintaining the standard to get it implemented and support it, which I believed, though I didn't expect it to happen as fast as it seems it is.
I still fault Apple for taking as long as they did to support RCS to begin with because they were leveraging iMessage & blue/green bubble SMS failures to pressure people into buying iPhones for basic communication with their social groups.
-
Comment on New policy changes for Southwest Airlines in ~travel
Grumble4681 Link ParentIt doesn't mean it will be cheaper, but they do have competition, so what are they going to be competing on? The 'free' checked bags was a value-add to some people who didn't see it as being...It doesn't mean it will be cheaper, but they do have competition, so what are they going to be competing on? The 'free' checked bags was a value-add to some people who didn't see it as being priced into the ticket cost, probably not a significant influence on selling a ticket to a potential customer but maybe for some it was, especially people who were checking bags. If they don't lower the pricing to account for the loss of 'free' checked bags, they're potentially losing those customers who check bags. Even if they lower the price of the tickets, the cost of checking the bags now most likely would end up making ticket prices higher than they were before when they were including checked bags because those people were being subsidized before by people who weren't checking bags.
The seating as far as value to customers goes might be a wash, hard to say, I don't think I'd like open seating but I would have to weigh that against how much I have to pay to get my preferred seat in assigned seating options.
-
Comment on Suggest a remote desktop program? in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentI use Splashtop in combination with Tailscale without having to pay, though I'll say it's not exactly something I feel super confident in to say I wouldn't have an issue on some occasion trying to...I use Splashtop in combination with Tailscale without having to pay, though I'll say it's not exactly something I feel super confident in to say I wouldn't have an issue on some occasion trying to access remotely.
Sometimes it will tell me that I can only use the free version on a local network and won't let me connect over Tailscale but I think I've just closed the app and reopened it or restarted my phone in one or two cases and in another case I couldn't get it to work at all I think because I had put my computer to sleep rather than powering it down first. I generally shut my PC down but that was one rare circumstance where I used sleep instead.
I also hook my PC up to a smart plug so I could force power cycle as another moonshot to correct an issue remotely. I have wake-on-lan enabled and it can be used when the PC is shut down and I have other devices on the network so I can use the Splashtop client to send the magic packet remotely.
-
Comment on Spotify down? No, your Spotify mod was just blocked—here's why it won't work anymore. in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentSounds like a similar situation to adblocking at that point. Their intention is that the person visiting the site is viewing the ads, and adblocking is finding a way around that and deriving...Putting the inadequacy of their technical barriers aside, if the intention (however poorly implemented) is for one-per-person and you’ve found a way around that, and you’re deriving financial gain[1], then that kinda sounds close to fraud to me, who is not a lawyer at all.
Sounds like a similar situation to adblocking at that point. Their intention is that the person visiting the site is viewing the ads, and adblocking is finding a way around that and deriving financial gain without 'paying'.
-
Comment on Spotify down? No, your Spotify mod was just blocked—here's why it won't work anymore. in ~tech
Grumble4681 Link ParentIt's probably a violation of their 1000 page Terms of Service but I don't know that it's piracy or fraud. The card information provided to them is valid, it doesn't matter what name I give them. I...It's probably a violation of their 1000 page Terms of Service but I don't know that it's piracy or fraud. The card information provided to them is valid, it doesn't matter what name I give them. I don't give my real name when creating an account on most sites but even if I did it wouldn't materially impact their ability to detect or block the accounts. The name also wouldn't materially impact their ability to identify me as the person behind the account, because they don't ask for social security or any unique identifying information so I could be one of hundreds or thousands of people with the same first and last name. Beyond that I don't know what laws would actually be broken.
-
Comment on Spotify down? No, your Spotify mod was just blocked—here's why it won't work anymore. in ~tech
Grumble4681 LinkThis might be relevant to people who are using this but perhaps end up being unable to use it after Spotify blocks them. Before I was using the modded Spotify, I was using privacy.com and signing...This might be relevant to people who are using this but perhaps end up being unable to use it after Spotify blocks them.
Before I was using the modded Spotify, I was using privacy.com and signing up for Pandora free trials. I was doing family trials and then adding my original account onto the family plan to try to keep my songs and what not, and it worked initially then towards the end I was having issues, not sure if I screwed something up or what. I'd make new accounts on Pandora by doing
myemail+march2025@gmail.comin there, and then in 2 or 3 months I'd domyemail+may2025@gmail.comand so on. There was one time where their system glitched somehow and I had the free trial for over a year. That has actually happened to me on another service too when I used privacy.com, I set the card limit to $1 total and then when the trial ended for NBA League Pass (which is something close to $200 for a whole season), the charge failed to go through as expected but the service did not end until the end of the season. Then privacy.com apparently has a blocklist where they eventually block you from using their temp cards for certain services, so I could no longer use it on NBA League Pass (I'm assuming that NBA threatens them with legal action or something).I'll admit, it's not a strategy for everyone because there's a bit of nuisance management, but just figured I'd mention it for anyone who ends up in a situation where they don't know what they want to do.
-
Comment on Is it wrong to use AI to fact check and combat the spread of misinformation? in ~tech
Grumble4681 LinkI'm hesitant about it, but it possibly depends on the level of involvement of the person who is using it. The biggest area where I'm hesitant with LLMs that is similar usage to what you're asking...I'm hesitant about it, but it possibly depends on the level of involvement of the person who is using it.
The biggest area where I'm hesitant with LLMs that is similar usage to what you're asking about is for summarizing, which I've seen some users here on Tildes use it for that. There have been numerous reports that LLMs do not always summarize information with only the information provided in the source material but instead sometimes fabricate new information that wasn't included in the source material that was asked to be summarized. Considering that summaries are generally done to avoid reading the lengthier source material, this makes their fabrications more susceptible to going unnoticed because if you don't read the source material how do you know if it was in there or if the LLM fabricated it?
I do think they can be used as a tool in the manner you're suggesting, but I don't see it as a net positive for LLMs in that regard. More so I see it as countering some of the misinformation that someone else possibly produced with an LLM and spread around. For every person who vets the information the LLM outputs before disseminating the information provided, how many aren't vetting it? Granted the person using it responsibly has no control over the people using it irresponsibly, so it's not to say one should abstain as though it stops others from using it irresponsibly, more so I'm saying that while it may be a tool for good in some cases, overall I seriously doubt that it's a net positive.
-
Comment on BlackRock strikes $23 billion deal to place Panama Canal ports under American control in ~society
Grumble4681 Link ParentI don't know the specifics of how Panama Canal ports work in terms of who controls and has authority over them and such, but based on the article it sounds like this constitutes a portion of the...I don't know the specifics of how Panama Canal ports work in terms of who controls and has authority over them and such, but based on the article it sounds like this constitutes a portion of the ports, not all of them.
In a press release, CK Hutchison Holding said Tuesday that it would sell all shares in Hutchison Port Holdings and all shares in Hutchison Port Group Holdings, in a deal valued at $22.8 billion. The two units hold 80% of the Hutchison Ports group that operates 43 ports in 23 countries, including two of the four major ports that exist along the Panama Canal. The deal will give the BlackRock consortium control over 43 ports in 23 countries, including Mexico, the Netherlands, Egypt, Australia, Pakistan and elsewhere.
It's also the case that this headline might be overselling the deal to an extent. They sold control of many ports, not just Panama Canal, but the timing of it does seem hard to believe it's just a coincidence.
It does at least say it's "two of the four major ports that exist along the Panama Canal" but doesn't say who controls the others.
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of March 3 in ~society
Grumble4681 (edited )Link ParentI don't know that it matters what the individual candidates say if they are otherwise aligned with the party, then they will take the flak that is attributed to the party even if the individual...I don't know that it matters what the individual candidates say if they are otherwise aligned with the party, then they will take the flak that is attributed to the party even if the individual candidates themselves never did or said any of the things that are bringing that negative attention. Harris and Walz are indisputably Democrats, so whatever a potential voter thinks or feels about Democrats, Harris and Walz have to contend with that. Compare that to someone like Bernie for example, who caucuses with Democrats but is otherwise an Independent, even when running in the Democratic Party primary for President, he was getting boxed out by establishment Democrats reasoning that he wasn't a Democrat. That was part of the 'outsider' perception of both him and Trump in that 2016 election.
Also I think using reason based messaging is weak and loses elections. Overwhelmingly the average voters have become emotionally motivated and don't vote based on reason, they vote on emotion. I'm not talking about emotion as in Sarah McLaughlin "In the arms of angel" ASPCA commercials emotion, more so how people feel their life is going or feel about certain things they perceive are happening in the world. If you also account for basic human nature where some things are easier to manipulate people to feel a certain way about things, whether that be anger or paranoia etc. then you realize these are the emotions that end up winning and losing elections more often than not. If you look back at Obama's 2008 election, that was certainly a case of optimism and more positive emotions winning out, still rooted in the idea of 'change' meaning that people weren't happy with where things were but were accepting of messaging that was optimistic and positive. You can only sell optimism and positivity in that form so many times if you don't bring about significant changes, and even when you do bring about significant changes you're still fighting the hedonic treadmill and the onslaught of money backed messaging to influence perception regardless of what significant changes did happen or were made. This ties back into my prior paragraph as well, these emotions become associated with parties based on all these factors and more, and those candidates have to overcome this association.
Edit: To add, it's also worth noting that the most recent non-reason based messaging that Democrats have used, the emotional motivation, has been fear. Of course Republicans use this too. Fear of the other side. Clearly it's effective on a large number of people, clearly not enough for Democrats to win, but I'm just adding this to say I realize Democrats aren't solely using reason-based messaging. The one issue I take with the fear-based messaging for Democrats is that in a way this has existed for a little while but has progressed and arguably I'd say Trump absolutely warrants being fearful for how he will misuse and abuse the power given to him, but the problem is that Democrats aren't selling a solution to this problem in the long-run. If Trump is to be feared and voters should elect any Democrat because they aren't Trump, how are Democrats going to stop the next Trump? I don't mean Trump himself, but what Trump represents, whoever fills that role beyond Trump. At a certain point I think some people see through this and it makes it look less genuine that Democrats fear Trump or anyone when they have no solution other than don't vote for the bad guy which just so happens to leave them and only them as the only alternative, and some people won't be receptive to reasoning so how do you sell them solution of reason?
I've gone through stages, when I was younger I was a hater just to hate (never to the degree you described), then I was indifferent but respected the products for what they were, then at a point I started disliking Apple for the way they handled iMessage/SMS/RCS for years. If not for that, I think I'd have stayed indifferent but respected that they offered things people wanted.
The way I see it now because of that dislike is not rational in a business sense, I understand why they do what they do, but they should stay in their lane at this point. Meaning they want it one way when it suits them, and then when it doesn't, they want it another way. They want a closed ecosystem with lock-in effects, fine, but then they do things like this with select services (Apple TV+, Apple Music) where they offer it to everyone, and I'm not buying it (literally). Keep your Apple TV+ and Apple Music to Apple hardware owners and fuck off, or take the open nature you apply to offering these services and apply it to the rest of the services and hardware in the ecosystem.