I mean, sure, but there was never anything stopping them from doing this in the first place except public pressure. Large companies changing tracks due to public demand is a good thing, and definitely a win.
I think its better to simply realize that a win doesn’t mean the fight is over. It’s okay to be happy about a success. Just don’t let up on the pressure.
It’s good to know that we have advanced as a society. We’re talking about now, not 80 years ago.
You also seem to be under the impression that making a “correct” choice would be without consequences. It would be nice if the moral or legal choice always had positive consequences for the chooser, but that’s not always the case. That doesn’t chance the morality or legality of the choice. Yes, soldiers have been persecuted for disobeying an illegal order; either legally or socially; but that doesn’t change their duty.
(Also, David McBride was arrested for releasing confidential documents, something that is very much illegal. We can debate the morality, but that’s not relevant here because it’s not remotely related to a soldier refusing to follow illegal orders.)
A soldier following an illegal order may lead to people dying unnecessarily, so they are duty bound to not follow illegal orders. A doctor choosing to not treat patients because they don’t like something about them may lead to people dying unnecessarily, so they are duty bound to treat all patients.
A doctor’s agency does not supersede another’s right to live. A doctor doesn’t get to choose who lives or dies; and yes, even requiring that the doctor refer the patient to a different doctor would result in people dying.
A soldier’s job includes disobeying illegal orders. That’s the law. Try again.
deleted by creator
My response would be that if you cannot explain your position, then you cannot defend it, and therefore you do not understand it yourself. This implies that you are simply feeling you way into your position using gut instincts, which are easily created and manipulated without a reasonably sound argument. An ad on TV, a op-ed piece only half heard, a slew of biased headlines, and more all contribute to these gut feelings without providing a rational base.
In short, I reject your claim that complicated positions cannot be explained. Yes, many can’t be easily explained, but you should still be able to explain and defend them.
So when the position is challenged and you can’t defend it because you have only these gut feelings at the core, you fall back on the belief that anyone would have the same feelings eventually. This is, of course, not true.
I hate that phrase so much.
It sole purpose is to belittle and dismiss the person you are talking to.
It tells the person that they are obviously unable to understand because of some unrelated trait. It’s an ad-hominim that just shuts down the conversation.
It’s only used by people that cannot actually defend their position, but rather than continue to discuss it, they would rather just shut out the other person.
It’s them telling the other person “you are less than me which is why you are wrong, and you must simply accept that because you cannot possibly understand how I am right.”
It also has built-in Facebook Container to isolate Facebook links.
Both the student loans and the ACA were actively gutted by Republicans, so they are a perfect example of why getting Republicans out is beneficial to you. You want student loan forgiveness? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. You want single-payer or socialized medicine? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. Both have been introduced by Democrats, both were voted on along party lines and failed due to Republicans.
You are missing my point: you are only hurting yourself and your goals with that strategy. Voting third party only helps Republicans and isn’t seen as any kind of protest by anyone who matters. No one says you have to LIKE voting for either of the parties, but only one party is closer to your goals, is actively trying to achieve your goals, and has a chance of actually getting elected so your goals can be achieved.
Why engage with people you don’t agree with? Because they will get you closer to what you want. What you want is voting reform, so vote for the people who are pushing for voter reform:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3313/text
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/5048
And not just federally, but locally as well:
https://fairvote.org/ranked-choice-voting-legislation/
It’s no coincidence that these bills are being introduced by Democrats. If you want these bills passed, they also need support to get them passed. As long as the house and senate are split between the Democrats and Republicans, these bills will not get passed. Simple as.
I’m not saying that voting Democrat will make them reverse course. I’m saying that voting Democrat so they have enough control to get these bills passed will let them complete the course they are already on so that you can get what you want.
And what happens in the mean time? Third parties almost always take votes from the Democrats. (That is to say, most of the people who vote third party would have voted Democrat if the third party was not on the ballot.) This gives a huge advantage to the Republican party on close elections. The result is further entrenching of the party that has the larger vested interest in not reforming the system. As a result, any generational movement has no chance of succeeding because the party that directly opposes their goal is always in power.
(To expand: since Democrats lose votes to third parties, they are the ones who would greatly benefit from any kind of ranked choice voting, so they tend to support such reforms. Since Republicans benefit more from FPTP, they tend to oppose such reforms.)
It’s all well and good to send a message, but that message will be received by the people who benefit most by ignoring that message.
The better method is to get people in power now who support election reform, get those reforms passed, then third party candidates become viable.
I’m not saying planned obsolescence isn’t a thing (because it is), but that’s not the only reason. Making phones smaller, lighter, faster, and more feature-dense all mean that the phone has to be built with tighter manufacturing and operating tolerances. Faster chips are more prone to heat and vibration damage. Higher power requirements means the battery has a larger charge/discharge cycle. And unfortunately, tighter operating tolerances mean that they can fall out of those tolerances much more easily.
They get dropped, shaken, exposed to large environmental temperature swings, charged in wonky ways, exposed to hand oils and other kinds of dirt, and a slew of other evils. Older phones that didn’t have such tight tolerances could handle all that better. Old Nokia phones weren’t built to be indestructible, they are just such simple phones that there isn’t much to break; but there’s a reason people don’t use them much anymore. You can still get simple feature phones, but the fact remains that they don’t sell well, so not many are made, and the ones that are made don’t have a lot of time and money invested in them.
Now Voyager is an extremely simple computer, made with technology that has huge tolerances, in an environment that is mostly consistent and known ahead of time so the design can deliberately account for it, had lots of testing, didn’t have to take mass production into its design consideration, didn’t have to make cost trade-offs, and has a dedicated engineering team to keep it going. It is still impressive that it has lasted this long, but that is more a testament to the incredible work that was and is being put into it than to the technology behind it.
Nope, you can do that with GPay, which is not the same as Google Pay, which is not the same as Google Wallet, but they all connect to the same account. Yay Google naming 😑.
“Google Pay” app is going away, but the “GPay” app is not, and you can use that for person to person transactions. Yay Google naming conventions.
Because Google is Google and can’t keep their own shit straight, there is a bit of confusion. “Google Pay” is going away, but “GPay” is not. You can still use the GPay app for person to person transactions. Google Wallet is used for things like tap-to-pay. Both apps link to the same underlying account.
Time management is different for everyone, and when you’re on a deadline, or just dealing with a one-off situation, the extra research has no value.
Sometimes you don’t need to know how the clock works, you just need to know what time it is.
ChatGPT and other LLMs allow the manipulation to exist in an unprecedented volume. When you have actual people making posts, there are limits on how fast a person can make them and high costs to hire more people which limit resources. LLMs let you make a script and crank out thousand of posts in minutes, each unique and able to bypass spam filters more easily.