Could any kind soul provide a TL;DW for those of us who can’t watch a video (for whatever reason)?

Yeah she sounds like the particular brand of idiot that we have in the UK. I fortunately don’t see that many of those… but still enough to find that sort of attitude recognisable.

Well the UK said they have no plans but now they have to actually debate it in Parliament. So it’s better than nothing - at least the proposal gets a chance to be heard.

I once had the great idea of drinking a litre of beetroot juice, which I had read is amazing for sports recovery because of something something helping blood carrying more oxygen or something like that.

Instant diarrhea, and on top of it, beetroot tinted it looked just like blood, so up until I realised what was going on and the fact that it actually wasn’t blood, that was a scary experience.

I don’t know whether beetroot is known to cause diarrhea or it was just my body noping the juice out of it, but I have steered clear of beetroot juice ever since!

Yes I do. I’m totally the one who can’t understand that “free” is a nuanced concept and something can be free when there are costs but they are externalised.

Exhausting. If you don’t consider anything in the world is free, why did you bother saying Lemmy isn’t free?

Plus this argument is rubbish, it’s like saying “my car isn’t free, nor is the road, nor is my petrol, so the beach isn’t free”.

Just because you have to buy clothes to go out for a walk, it doesn’t make it any less free.

What are you trying to argue here? That the term “free” shouldn’t exist because in a capitalist society everything has dependencies? (I still don’t get how that relates to my original post which was purely about doing business with corporations).

Then fine, Lemmy isn’t free, neither is the sun, or going for a walk. You win. Good day sir.

Don’t run it on a raspberry pi, run it on the same computer you use to access the Google search you are happy to call “free”.

Edit: Actually yes, both this and the healthcare need to be free - otherwise you’re grossly misunderstanding one of the key parts of the mission of open source. I pay for this so that whoever can’t afford it can access for exactly zero. Same for the healthcare - you might say it’s “not free” and everyone should contribute but what to you or me is nothing, could mean that grandma doesn’t get to eat. So yeah, free access needs to be a possibility. That’s the mission. I contribute to open source software and donate where I can so others who don’t have the knowledge or money can access it for free. There can’t be a price.

Uh, what a weird message. It’s not only unrelated to what I said but it reads like an attempt to twist my words. On top of it, it’s totally wrong: Lemmy is free. I can self host Lemmy on a raspberry pi for exactly 0€.

The instance I use… Is also free. I donate because I choose to, but if my friend can’t afford to donate they can still use the instance. Nobody is profiting from it.

What I did talk about is products and doing business with corporations. With Lemmy there’s no product, whether you pay or not. With SearxNG (which many people self host, and again, is free) you’re not the product, regardless of how much you pay.

That’s what I was replying to - your comment is way off the mark and very condescending: I don’t need to be mansplained that I should donate to the software I already donate to. Note donate rather than pay for.

That’s only when doing business with corporations, but there’s also the option of open source (e.g. SearxNG).

Or do you consider yourself the product when using Lemmy?

Well, it has 10x more speakers than German, but it still has fewer speakers than English and most of them are localised in a single country.

What’s the problem with hexbear, is it the same? Genuine question - I think the only community in hexbear I follow is “Gaming” and it’s reasonably civil there.

Is there pirate software on F-Droid?? (I’m assuming that’s what OP is referring to based on us being on /piracy)

Thanks GPT, very useful

Yeah, true. Charging a tax on downloaded copyrighted material can be kinda okay if you don’t actively chase it. It’s not right to charge people a penalty for doing something but then prevent them from doing it. You can’t have it both ways, if it’s not right you can chase it, but don’t make me pay for doing something I’m not allowed to do! That would be like having to preemptively pay traffic fines before you actually drive over the speed limit, just in case.

This is one of the rare things where the Spanish left and right agree, for different reasons.

Simplifying a lot:

• The left generally supports culture, actors, theatre, writers, Spanish made movies. They see piracy as a threat to the earnings of those people.
• The right has historically cut any sorts of subsidies to the “culture creators”, but they see piracy as a threat to the publishing, TV (…) industries.

They both support SGAE, which translates cleanly to the General Society of Authors and Editors, who protects their interests by charging fees to everyone who dares look at copyrighted work.

• You own a bar and you play TV, Radio, or Spotify? You have to pay SGAE.
• You buy a computer, part of the money goes to SGAE.
• You buy a blank CD, DVD, Hard Drive, you pay SGAE (because they know you will put copyrighted material there, and if you don’t, well, fuck you)

It’s a fucked up system and I don’t know if things have changed in the past few years as I don’t live in Spain anymore. But it honestly feels like a prosecution of the population who is so evil and trying to destroy Spanish Culture.

In a press release, police say the device is “in fact a Douglas AIR-2 Genie (previous designation MB-1), an unguided air-to-air rocket that is designed to carry a 1.5 kt W25 nuclear warhead”.

I’m sure I’m missing a trick here but what is the purpose of an air-to-air unguided rocket with a nuclear warhead?? Blowing up other planes with 100000% extra risk whether you hit or miss?

Oh I had never thought of this or come across this concept! That’s a really elegant concept. Of course, in a transaction you’re putting in more effort than the money. The time it takes you to go through the purchase, the research, the cost of opportunity of that money… meaning those have to be covered in the cost of the transaction, and therefore the goods must be cheaper than the perceived value by those amounts.

You’ve sent me down a rabbit hole and I thank you for that. Now I’m off to read about economics 🤓

This is actually written by a woman, who believes she can’t even hope to care past her own needs or desires, or even pretend like an AI does.