AHappyCamper

Truly a shame. Good marketing tho

This belongs next to Standfords research into sterilising white males. "Harmful language"? Sounds like a dystopian dictatorial nightmare. "We're enslaving you to protect you from yourselves..." should be their new motto.

This is obviously the first part of a major push to force us to use Central Bank Digital Currencies. Now that they are banning cash, we will be controlled like never before. This is the beginning of the end of freedom.

Yes, but how much did it cost them?

I'm sorry, but that's a whackadoodle approach to engineering. 40C is well within the range of expected temperatures, and the men who designed it failed epically. There have been heatwaves in the UK since 1911 where the temp approaches 40C.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/from-the-archive-blog/20...

That still sounds like really, really, really bad design. 40C is not a hurricane, flood, or volcano. It's a mildly hot day. Engineering fail.

Essential service melts at 40°C..... well, that wasn't designed very well, was it?

They didn't block the N word

Adios, you bearded dark wizard

Lawyers who want to get rich and earn a fat payday. The bill of rights states that her actions are outright illegal. It's an easy win for anyone who doesn't fear the Twitterati.

Yes, I'm a bit of a troll, but honestly, when it's done in a healthy way, it improves the system by providing measured resistance.

She's a racist and she represents the company as their hiring manager. They read her tweets and approve of them, and are thus liable for her actions.

These are not her personal opinions - she states that they form the basis of her choices re who gets hired.

No. This is the hiring manager. They are not just one person. She represents the company Dropbox, and they will be judged for her actions as their ambassador.

Without being able to ratio likes to dislikes, every video on YouTube becomes useless for information value. Every video is now for entertainment only, which is what the communist radical left wants - when there is no truth, then whoever shouts the loudest becomes the voice of truth. They have taken a big step towards ruining the internet.

Thank goodness science is in COMPLETE agreement when it comes to climate. I mean, if there was more than one scientific opinion about climate, then this ban would be ludicrous....

I wonder how this comment will affect your Social Credit Score. With centralised digitised currencies coming, I hope you'll still be allowed to buy groceries.

Carefully protected? That's security stuff. I'm asking if Apple is analysing everything I do on their computers.

From the links above, it seems that Apple's Privacy policy reserves the rights to monitor ALL your data and usage of its devices, and that it then actuates this policy using snooping mechanisms in Mac OS. Do you agree?

Here are two:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38Epj6ldKU

https://www.notebookcheck.net/MacOS-Big-Sur-is-spying-on-eve...

There's always a "reason" why an evil decree is actually quite logical and palatable - just look at Whoopie Goldberg's latest scandal. But that doesn't stop it from being evil. This is an outright attempt to close the net. An open web means that anyone can say anything, and that concept horrifies and terrifies FAANG. They want a total monopoly on thought, and any "excuse" they give for closing the web is just that - an excuse.

If only there was a readily available, highly effected treatment for COVID that you could buy over the counter and had no side effects..... oh wait... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34194240/

And yet you care enough to write a comment... So I guess you really do care and you do know who I am. Thanks for the love Amigo ;)

Teaching people that dissent is illegal and/or not tolerated is not infantile. Orwell discussed it at length in his book ;)

Your argument cuts both ways - why not just have a bot that likes and comments on the videos that you want to push. So now by your logic, we should BAN all likes and comments. So now nothing means anything, and YouTube will just tell us if a video is good or not.

Doesn't sound like a great plan. How about Google re-instates the Dislike button and works harder to filter out the bots. i.e. Don't harm the product and the UX.

I respectfully disagree. Morals matter. Your point is like saying, "if you don't like the printing press/hydrogen bomb/automobile, then just don't use it.".

YouTube is an integral part of sharing information, and the like/dislike ratio is a crucial yardstick of if the content is trustworthy. 95% of the content is not bullsh*t in my mind, and if it is, then why not have the dislike button anyway?

Not at all. Youtube content moderation is not intended for things like content quality, only for egregious breaches of YouTube policy like harassment, abuse, or hate speech.

If a guy in the video says "bend your foot at the ankle all the down until you hear a loud pop and feel something give", then reporting the video will do nothing. Downvoting it will inform other users that this is maybe not a good idea.