I think it’s less that they have found an “excuse” to raise prices (companies always want more money, that’s what companies do), and more that they have acquired the leverage to do so. Fast food restaurants have accumulated brand recognition and customers that are psychologically attached to their products. People are less used to cooking their own food and have less time with which they might do it. We are poorer in relative wealth terms, companies are richer and more vertically integrated, we are in a worse negotiating position.

imo seems inappropriately formal

I remember it being especially bizarre because it basically means going through a large portion of the game with a more or less useless character soaking up xp, after which you either have a slightly less useless underlevelled character or one that’s brokenly OP depending on how you planned out the combo. And if you dual class too late you just never get to that point and it’s all drawback no benefit.

The profit they get from the sale of the television should be enough that they don’t have to make the television shit to get slightly more profit, why do people even buy these

But televisions cost hundreds of dollars at least

“each new connected TV platform user generates around $5 per quarter in data and advertising revenue.”

Sounds like a pathetic amount of money for betraying your customers with a shitty ad infested smart tv

I don’t understand this attitude. If an argument is good, why wouldn’t it be valuable or matter? I think it would benefit people a lot if everyone put more thought and consideration into their arguments, especially in the direction of conveying some original thought that isn’t just a remix of the same tired propaganda style rhetoric everyone’s heard a million times before. “Winning” doesn’t matter, but collaboratively thinking about things with other people matters, and a good way to do that is through argument.

If a government is imposing harmful censorship I think supporting resistance of that censorship is the right thing to do. A company that isn’t located in that country, ethically shouldn’t be complying with such orders. Make them burn political capital taking extreme and implausible measures.

Coyotes are pretty small though, I think cattle would still be more dangerous.

The company being successful probably wasn’t doing humanity any favors anyway

Anti-money laundering provisions in the EU have been adjusted several times though

Adjusted to give more leeway? Can you cite a source on this happening

Better but still pretty bad, in that case can only hope the software/trading ecosystems for p2p improve enough to be more generally viable and that once that happens there won’t be reactive legislation to stamp it out.

Because of inflation, it’s not going to stay 3k. All rules of this type have fixed amounts that never get updated and every year encompass more transactions.

Supposedly this legislation also bans anonymous cryptocurrency.

The fear of a resume gap is pretty tyrannical, I think a better solution than being afraid of ever going a while without a job would be resolve to just lie if you have to. Plus there’s a variety of ways to make money other than a job, not all of which are illegal.

Not even

It is a carnivorous rodent, dining on insects (such as grasshoppers), worms, spiders, centipedes, mantis, scorpions, snakes, and even other mice.

The southern grasshopper mouse has around a 3.5 to 5.0 inches (8.9–12.7 cm) long body

[Least weasel] Average body length in males is 130 to 260 mm (5 to 10 in), while females average 114 to 204 mm (4.5 to 8.0 in)

To me the most obvious tell is, these costumes would be a lot of work, seems like intricate body makeup, and coordinated between five people. And then they’re somewhat anonymous and the cops have to ask on Facebook about them, instead of aggressively trying to put out viral videos of themselves doing this? There is no way.

Explicit types are just laziness, you should be catching exceptions anyways.

After all, they - the U.S. and its crappy allies - have declared a war on us without rules!

How about that “no nukes” rule tho

Really interesting article. The general idea seems to be that people having their access to banking shut down has been a real problem for a long time, and is most commonly imposed on marginalized groups, but people don’t realize it’s going on, and the people on the right making noise about this issue ignore where the bulk of the problem is.

This is sometimes how I feel when I appear on the ‘anti-mainstream’ ‘free thought’ media outlets. They want to hear about the financial censorship of the Freedom Convoy, but they don’t want to hear about restrictions on Aboriginal payments. This hints to a skew in their freedom of thought, and it’s certainly not open-minded. When they approach me, they’re trying to recruit that mercenary side of me who is nominally prepared to defend their narrow free thinking, but this poses an ethical dilemma, because their selective curation of what examples of payments censorship they’re prepared to ask about or listen to amounts to a silent form of censorship in itself. Selectively hearing, and amplifying, one set of injured voices - the Truckers - can be very similar to blocking another set out.

Firstly, yes, it’s very important to fight the general principle of payments censorship (and, by extension, to protect the cash system that provides a buffer agai nst it). Secondly, I must inform them that the actual chances of payments censorship being used against them is smaller than the chances of it being used against refugees, migrants, the homeless, or sex workers, who face recent real-world cases of financial censorship.