un_owen

The main purpose of ads isn't to sell you a specific product immediately, their real purpose is to expose you to their brand to make the brand more familiar (and therefore more trustworthy) to you.

For example, recently, I needed a new insurance. So of course I went to the websites of the 5 insurance companies that I knew from advertising and compared their offers. Then I went to a comparison portal, which again I knew from the ads. The best offer was from a brand I didn't know so I went with the second one which was from a well known brand. I trusted the second offer more, simply because the brand felt more familiar to me.

Here's another story: there is this big online clothing store. I always hated their ads, they were really annoying, and at that time I didn't understand why anyone would buy clothes online. So guess where I went, 5 years later, after a disappointing offline shopping tour, in desparate need for new clothes?

He's such a pussy, he needs to be careful that he doesn't grab himself by accident.

Oh right, I was not aware of JKRs comments on funding anti-trans organisations

That's literally the point we've been trying to make for years. I couldn't care less about whatever shitty "opinions" JKR posts on her Twitter profile, that's not what makes her problematic. JKR is problematic because she is actively funding anti-trans campaigns.

I.e. that people often don't have deep insight into the creators of the art they are enjoying, so considering liking Harry Potter as a statement about their feelings on the author doesn't resonate with me

Which is fair, but then the same people get offended when you try to educate them. It's the same debate every time a new Harry Potter medium is announced. At this point, you must be living under a rock if you are a Harry Potter fan and have never heard of the controversy that surrounds JKR.

I think most people don't know about JKR because they don't want to know. They are afraid that when they dig deeper, they will have to let go of their favorite franchise, so they choose denial and ignorance instead. It's hard to give people the benefit of the doubt when a topic has been discussed so many times for so many years.

Sure, that seems reasonable to keep away from minors. Like, I couldn't commit to whether or not I was a "music person" at that age;

People need to understand that not receiving hormone treatment is also a commitment to a gender—one that you don't identify with. From that perspective, it's plain stupid to deny children the treatment they need.

To stay with your example, let's say you are 14, interested in music, but you hate sports. You might not be able to commit to being a "music person" at that age, but it would still be the obvious choice to further explore your interest in music rather than forcing yourself into being sports person instead.

And sure, there are blockers to delay some developments, but I feel like a lot of people don't recognize that this is not a choice between A and nothing, but between A and B, and one path permanently locks you out of the other.

It's basically two words that happen to be written as one: "Hersteller übergreifend". We do this a lot in German. When you say it out loud, you are allowed to take a short break between the two parts of a compound noun. But nowadays, with all the influences from the English language, some people seem to forget that compound nouns even exists. So even native German speakers sometimes struggle to remember whether two words must be written together or with a space in between. It doesn't help that auto correction/spell checkers aren't very good with compound nouns either.

No it wouldn't. Corpos would just put in more effort to hide the damage. Climate change can't be stopped by individual consumers because they have no means to verify whether a product they want to buy hurts the environment.

Ich frage mich, ob das wirklich in unserem Interesse ist. Nach Zeit bezahlt zu werden hat immerhin den Vorteil, dass wir auch bezahlt werden, wenn mal nichts zu tun ist. Sollte man nach tatsächlich geleisteter Arbeit bezahlt werden, könnte es schnell zu Streitigkeiten führen – „Sie haben heute nichts geleistet, deshalb bezahle ich Sie heute nicht“. Nichtsdestotrotz bin ich natürlich auch für die Einführung einer 4-Tage-Woche.

1. Das Thema wird hauptsächlich von Rechten gepusht, die damit Wahlkampf machen. Niemand ist besessener von dem Thema als die GOP/AfD/Union.

2. Bei der Sprache gehts glaub ich immer noch vor allem um die Sichtbarmachung von Frauen. Dass mit dem Gender-Stern auch alle anderen Identitäten mit eingeschlossen werden, ist ein netter Nebeneffekt. Gegner des Genderns sind ja meist Verfechter des s.g. generischen Maskulinums, aber das fördert halt Ungleichheiten zwischen Mann und Frau (vor allem weil diese Leute dann trotzdem immer von Putzfrau, Sekretärin und Krankenschwester reden, sobald es um "Frauenberufe" geht)

3. Du hast es schon richtig erfasst: "gefühlt". Es ist unwichtig, ob man nun zig verschiedene Identitäten aufzählen und zuordnen kann, der Punkt ist doch "du kannst sein wer du willst, lass dir nicht von andern irgendeine Identität aufdrücken, die nicht du bist".

4. Weil Sprache sich dynamisch entwickelt und nicht von einem zentralen Gremium festgelegt wird. Aber der Stern scheint sich ja durchzusetzen, zumindest nach meiner Wahrnehmung.

5. Lieber legt man sich nicht fest, als dass man sich (unwissentlich) falsch festlegt. Ich hab Jahre damit verbracht, so zu tun, als wär ich ein Mann, weil das für mich so festgelegt worden ist, und glaub mir, gesund war das nicht. Und niemand will Kinder davon abhalten, ihre eigene Identität zu finden, man darf es halt nur nicht für sie fremdbestimmen.

That’s not the usual evil corp BS they pull.

Yes it is. Why do you think they force you to pay for YT Music when all you want is an ad free experience? I tell you why: people will come to the realization that it is stupid to pay for two music streaming services at the same time, so they will cancel their Spotify subscription. This will make it extremely hard for other services to stay competitive. It's no longer enough that their app is perhaps slightly better, or that they have the better algorithm, no one will be willing to pay the extra 11 € per month for just that. So eventually, these competing music streaming services will die (maybe with the exception of Apple Music and Amazon Music). Once YouTube has the monopoly on the music streaming market, they can raise the prices again. They are using one monopoly to build a second one. And a third one. And so on, until everything is owned by Google, Amazon, Meta, Apple, or Microsoft and no one is able to compete with anything anymore. And the worst part is, that Google doesn't even deserve any of YouTube's success. YouTube's success comes from its creators. All that Google ever did is to provide some servers and some bandwith, which arguably is expensive, but it's not really an achievement. They didn't even invent YouTube, they just bought it, made it big, and now abuse it to conquer more and more markets.

It might be reasonable, but the question still stands: why does Microsoft put so much effort into trying to convince people to use Edge? The purpose of Edge is to have a preinstalled browser so that you can start working right away and don't need to rely on 3rd party software to do basic tasks. Great, I get that. Every OS has their own preinstalled browser. But what I don't get is, why do they actively try to stop you from using a different browser? Why do they put in so much effort to stop you from installing Chrome? Why do they not put in the same effort when you try to install Notepad++ or Paint.Net? What's so special about a browser, compared to other standard software? I can think of anti-consumer reasons, like harvesting and selling your data. And yes, Chrome isn't any better in that regard, but at least you make the choice yourself.

Dude, nothing is more suspicious than when a developer of a supposedly free app nags you to use their app. Why do they even want you to use Edge so badly? You're never going to pay any money for it, this screams "give us your data, we want to sell it".

Sure, just throw money at the corpos, but please don't act surprised when they suddenly double the premium fee, or when they start sneaking in ads for premium users. That's the problem with corpo greed, it just never ends, and the moment you give in to it, you lose.