Great choice of website:
Independent journalism is made possible by advertising.
That is the polar opposite of the truth.
So you think they should just make no money because you’re mildly inconvenienced?
No. If you make money from ads your clients are the adversers and your readers are an asset you seek to capitalize. That is in opposition to journalistic integrity.
I’m not saying they aren’t allowed to show ads, but I am saying that once they do, they are no longer allowed to refer to themselves as independent.
No company that wants to advertise on your website is stupid enough to sign away editorial control, i.e. once you agree to display their ads, you are no longer allowed to say anything bad about them. And even if they did, there’s still the looming risk that if you do, they are well within their rights to pull their ads and there goes your income.
If you’re going to show ads, be honest to your readers about what that means.
NoteBookCheck is a legit website, what issue do you have with them? I always found their reviews and information and testing to be high quality
This is like shitting on GamersNexus because they removed some shitty product in every video to make money
The dude who wrote the message you responded to is probably a Linux user and privacy weirdo or something.
This is Lemmy. EVERYONE is either a Linux user, a privacy weirdo or both.
Source: I’m both
"People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.
You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.
Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.
You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs."
– Banksy
Steve Jobs was a piece of shit human being who contributed nothing to technology.
That said, he was a hell of a skilled bullshitter/marketer. Most people fucking looooove to be bullshitted, and Americans more than most.
It’s why we elect virtually no wonks/technocrats, even though thats who we should elect almost exclusively. We’d rather some snake oil motherfucker sell us on magical lies while telling us we’re pretty.
I’ve never complimented, or defended Steve Jobs before, because he was a grade A piece of shit…but, Steve Jobs transformed technology precisely because he was a phenomenal salesman, with a great eye for technical talent.
Just because he wasn’t an engineer, doesn’t change the fact that he forged Apple into what it became, and that absolutely contributed to modern technology - for better, and worse.
I think marketers should get to take credit for ad campaigns they create, and engineers should get to take credit for technology they create.
Capitalists just want to take the credit for what others do. Societal leeches. I don’t buy into their false narrative that providing the means of production they hoard out of greed means they deserve most to all of the credit for what they permit talented people to engineer and produce by the swear of their brow and the migraines of their solutions.
We should be rewarding the Teslas of the world for what they invent, and punishing the Edisons that would claim other’s inventions as their own. But we suck, so we won’t.
Moving goalpost?
You said he didn’t contribute to technology, so I pointed out that he’s responsible for Apple becoming what it became, which itself transformed technology.
Now, you’re saying he shouldn’t get technical credit for…making the iPhone?
Okay…I never said he should…but it you want to go down that path, he was very hands-on with in the design processes for two of their most pivotal products: the iMac and iPod.
Again, he was a grade-A douche bag, who died a fucking hilariously stupid death, but that doesn’t erase, or override his impact.
Steve Jobs could sell his turds to the Apple fanboys, and they would eat it up.
Doesn’t mean what he sold is some culinary dish or he a master chef. Just that he could sell them whatever he wants, no matter what it was. Whether it was technology or not.
Just because he wasn’t an engineer, doesn’t change the fact that he forged Apple into what it became,
I think the big complaint about Jobs is not the lack of engineering skills, but that he got where he did through deception, taking advantage of people, and often treating folks like garbage. Many of us view him as unworthy of celebrating, because the ends don’t justify the means.
(There’s also the fact that what Apple became was not all good, but perhaps that’s a separate discussion.)
who contributed nothing to technology.
If it wasn’t for jobs Wozniak would still be putting breadboards together in his garage. We have no idea what the personal computer ecosystem would have looked like without the apple 2. He gets a lot more credit than he deserves sometimes but the idea that he contributed nothing is absurd. If he had contributed nothing you wouldn’t know his name.
It’s also partially because any decent engineer/technocrat both lacks sufficient charisma and cash flow, and more importantly looks at public service and says “there’s no reliable way I can keep my morals and make a difference there.” As an engineer myself, I can’t imagine dealing with the general public. Choosing the correct, logical path will never win over people who put opinions and faith/feelings over reasoning and science. We’ve seen it time and time again and I’m not going to bang my head against that wall.
Instead I help friends and family, contribute to open source and projects I believe in and be the change I want to see in the world. Trying to do that as an elected official would foster insanity and pushback from those who don’t care and only want their side to win, regardless of the overall outcome.
Also: yes SJ was a POS, but he was a POS with charisma, a plan, and smart enough to surround himself with people who could make his ideas happen… and then micromanage them.
After listening to the recent Behind the Bastards episode on him, yeah absolutely. It’s amazing his legacy isn’t judged more harshly.
He’s one of those people who died at the right time to preserve their own legacies, before public reckonings for non illegal bad behavior became common.
It’s amazing his legacy isn’t judged more harshly.
Have you read the rest of this thread?
Take a look at Apple stock over the last 12 years the company is worth literally 10x what it was worth when Jobs died. What a dumb framing.
I hate how people point towards profit and claim that is an argument a company is successful.
It is easy to make a lot of money when exploiting workers, customers and all the people of the countries you evade taxes in.
It is like claiming drug barons, mafia bosses and human traffickers are successful. Successful in evading the law maybe.
I think people love to hate Steve. The one thing people love more than a great figurehead, is hating one. I think that Steve had a great internal model of how to combine form/function.
iPhone wasn’t the first smartphone, but it may as well have been. It brought the smartphone to the mass market.
Part of it was a great advertising campaign, which unlike the smartphones at the time, pitched it as a luxury good as opposed to an executive enterprise one. You owned a blackberry to answer emails wherever and whenever you were, you owned an iphone so you can check Google Maps. A large part of it was redefining both the form factor, and use case of a smartphone.
At the time iPhone 1 didn’t seem like anything smarter than an iPod that could take calls. I was hyped over the Nokia 770 and eager to see what else would come out with Meamo OS. It took till mid 2008 until iPhone 3G and iOS 2 (and app store) were released.
An ipod with a much larger screen (320×240 vs 480x320), a camera, and could take phone calls, browse the internet, and do email.
I’m pretty sure the main reason people hate Jobs is because by all accounts he was an absolute ass and was objectively a wackadoodle when it came to that homeopathic healing shit and not showering.
Oh, he was an absolute asshole. Seems I deleted that sentence. RIP me.
“I have enabled and ushered in a new age of knowledge access like no other, here’s a cool way to eat that goes against all reasonable nutritionists’ advice. Sounds good to me!” - Really seems like a fitting way to kick off this century IMO.
Jobs’ vision was fundamentally to make technology accessible to the masses.
Bullshit, maybe Woz had that, but Jobs? No way! His goal right from the Apple II was clearly to make money, and maximize it by controlling the tech instead of setting it free.
Already with Macintosh it was a “walled garden”, with many closed aspects to secure Apple had control. With iPhone it became even worse, and has NOTHING to do with making tech accessible, on the contrary. He made it easy because there’s money in that, he didn’t make it accessible, the price structure alone makes that an obviously false statement.
Jobs had an eye for design, but to call it that he wanted to make it accessible, is like arguing a fashion designer makes expensive designer clothes to make it accessible to people.
