top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 94 points 1 year ago (13 children)

I wonder why all these totally unrelated things in the world are going to shit? Maybe theres a common thread

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    People still look at me like I’m some sort of conspiracy theorist when I say that it’s all connected back to capitalism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    A friend of mine recently called me more brainwashed than anyone for questioning capitalism and said how can I question a system that gives me bread and butter.

    When I tried to point out that the system does not give me food by the goodness of it's heart but rather extracts something out of me in return, he pointed out that Milton Friedman was a staunch supporter of capitalism and there is no way I can know more than him.

    But the truth is, the world is crumbling. And I had rather believe what is unfolding before my own eyes than an economics textbook from 1970s (not to mention, that unlike say math economics isn't that objective a field. Just like he purported a free market supporting Economist, I too can forward names of folks who support the opposite POV).

    The day folks stop seeing themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires would be awakening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Most people are just in denial. The left has been calling out capitalism as the problem for over a century

    There was just a decent period in the middle there for the west that put a lot of people into complacency, but finally we're starting to approach the logical conclusions of capitalism again, and it's all coming crashing down

    Unfortunately I strongly believe that things are going to get much worse before they get better. I think the vast majority will need to be shocked into action

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 79 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    The case stems from online media company Axel Springer’s lawsuit against Eyeo - the maker of the popular Adblock Plus browser extension.

    Axel Springer says that ad blockers threaten its revenue generation model and frames website execution inside web browsers as a copyright violation.

    FYI, Axel Springer is a company and owns Business Insider (since 2015), Politico, and Politico Europe (since 2021). They suck.

    Gudrun Kruip, a scholar associated with the Stiftung Bundespräsident-Theodor-Heuss-Haus, has claimed that Axel Springer SE, along with its subsidiaries, exhibits a pro-American stance, often omitting criticism of US foreign policy.[58] This observation is then backed by allegations made by two former CIA officers in an interview with The Nation, claiming that Axel Springer received $7 million from the CIA.[59] The purpose of this funding, they allege, was to influence the publisher to align its editorial content with American geopolitical interests.[59]

    As of 2001, the Axel Springer SE names "solidarity with the libertarian values of the United States of America" as one of its core principles on its website.[60] This explicit stance has led to critiques from scholars and independent observers regarding the company's perceived alignment with American interests.[58][61][62][63][64] Furthermore, an article in Foreign Policy has critiqued Axel Springer SE for a history of compromising journalistic ethics to support right-wing causes, implying a longstanding pattern of bias in its publications.[65]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axel_Springer_SE#Criticism

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Seems like you forgot the Bild Zeitung, the worst piece of media out there (comparable to the Sun I've heard):

    It is the best-selling European newspaper and has the sixteenth-largest circulation worldwide. Bild has been described as "notorious for its mix of gossip, inflammatory language, and sensationalism" and as having a huge influence on German politicians.

    They also bought a lot of other services, see this list, seems like it's not maintained anymore but still.

    Let's also not forget the time that Mathias Döpfner stole the German election in 2021 so that the FDP could screw over the coalition, see here:

    Zwei Tage vor der Bundestagswahl soll er Reichelt gedrängt haben: "Please Stärke die FDP. Wenn die sehr stark sind, können sie in Ampel so autoritär auftreten, dass die platzt und dann Jamaika funktioniert."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Axel Springer company is even worse, their CEO said a year ago that all east-germans are either fascist or communist and that their opinions are to be dismissed, basically stating us as second-class-citizen. He owns the most fakenews spewing tabloids in Germany, BILD and WELT If you want to pinpoint one person where hate and fakenews come from in central europe, Mathias Döpfner, CEO of Axel Springer SE, is the culprit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 54 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If Germany bans ad blockers and a German citizen or company becomes victim to a malicious advertisement, do they have a case against the German government or by extension Axel Springer?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 48 points 1 year ago

    It's my computer.

    Fuck you.

  • source
  • [+] 44 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (13 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    I think the logic here is that the code to deliver an ad is protected by copyright and your modification of that code is considered a derivative work that is protected under copyright law.

    But that's not what happens at the browser level.

    The HTML code is sent, whole cloth, to the browser. The browser inspects the code, you know, to do browser stuff.

    During this inspection, the code is put against the ad block rules. Nothing is modified. If the code violates some sort of logic, it doesn't get rendered properly.

    Hell, the opposite argument is probably more damning. Say you have this literal HTML:

    <html>
    <title>I use arch</title>
    <p>
    Btw
    hello
    World</html>
    

    You could argue the browser is NOT showing your code the way you intended (e.g. "Btw hello World" being rendered though I'm not sure if spaces would be there or not).

    At the end of the day, unless you send your webpage as an image, you can't guarantee how the browser will render it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [+] 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
    [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Is it illegal for me to fast forward the previews at the beginning of my VHS too? WTF?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago

    Internet advertising, spreading malware since the 90s. Barely do anything to hold digital advertisement networks accountable for what they distribute, not even copyright/fraudulent website cloning for servicing malware, but always ready to crack down on people trying to browse the internet more securely and always ready to make more money for the rich

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

    Europe went from leader of internet freedom to Stasi police Gestapo in a few months.

    Guess there's a top down policy to implement Fascism across Europe soon, judging by the speed at which Europe is passing dracnonic internet control.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    This is grounded in the assertion that a website’s HTML/CSS is a protected computer program that an ad blocker intervenes in the in-memory execution structures (DOM, CSSOM, rendering tree), this constituting unlawful reproduction and modification.

    This is ridiculous... the in-memory structures are highly browser dependent, the browser is the one controlling how the DOM is represented in memory.. it would imply that opening the website AT ALL in a different version of the exact specific one they target or with a different set of specific features/settings would also be a violation, since the memory structure would likely be different too.

    At that point, they might as well just ask for their website to not be visited at all.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    If that lawsuit is successful then I’ll be next in line suing security camera companies for disrupting my breaking and entering business.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    What better way to let the people know whose interests the regime really represents.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Run a DNS ad blocker like pihole or Adguard.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Black mirror 15 Million Merits

    And this....

    ...in a nutshell is US patent US8246454B2. Sony owns the rights since 2009 but has not implemented it. When the permit expires in 2030, it will basically be open for other companies to use

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Honestly, ban advertising entirely. It shits in your brain and slowly ruins everything. Even perfectly profitable businesses go - what if we made all the money, and fucked our customers' eyeballs?

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I can literally open up the development console and manually click an ad, and delete it. Am I now hacking and sabotaging a protected program?

    WTF is this for nonsense, what mental gymnastics....?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    You WILL finance the pizza

    You WILL watch an ad every minute

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    "The EU recognizes the right of users to choose what content they receive, including the ability to block unwanted advertising."

    what happened to our privacy rights? Are they being dismantled in order for giant tech companies to take a foothold in controlling the masses? I mean that's what we get when we elect a self-proclaimed "transatlantist" chancellor. Fuck Merz and his blackrock cronies

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is grounded in the assertion that a website’s HTML/CSS is a protected computer program that an ad blocker intervenes in the in-memory execution structures (DOM, CSSOM, rendering tree), this constituting unlawful reproduction and modification.

    This would also ban Dark Mode features and extensions.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    Oh boy, those scam centers are going to make the big buck if this really happens.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Mozilla guy saying there's a risk, but i dont really see it, myself.

    Firstly, does copyright really prevent modification for personal use? I dont think it does.

    Secondly, you're not so much modifying the content as not consuming part of it. I think thats an important distinction for the court to grapple with.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    well, axel springer was a nazi so

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Same thing goes for the "porn bans will destroy the internet" posts:

    One day it will happen and a few countries will do this, ban adblock or require ID for porn. But I am not so certain it's a bad thing for us technically savvy people. Tor, i2p and such will get a huge influx of people. Totally new cultures will form there. It will be exciting. I will not NOT block advertising and I think many will do the same. So even if that's going to be illegal, it will either not be enforced (that would be bad) or it will lead to people finding a different place in the internet that advertising hasn't reached yet :)

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Time to outright disable Javascript in my browsers and just deal with the broken sites and generally less useful web.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›