I can assure you “capital” is really happy with the dirt cheap labour that immigration brings. The destruction of the lower class is not their concern.
Part of the reason capital likes anti-immigrant politics is that the end policy result isn't getting rid of unempowered labor, its reducing more people to unempowered labor for capital, rather it is via detention in public facilities that provide labor, directly or indirectly, for private efforts, detention in private facilities that can have work requirements, or "temporary passes" that give the employer control of status. [0]
Oh come on, we all know and expect bugs, but this was something spectacularly bad. They caused the very thing people were paying them to try and defend from. This incident had very real and serious consequences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_CrowdStrike-related_IT_ou...
Turns out their clients don’t think the consequences were that serious.
Yeah, thats an interesting point. I'd be interested to read analysis on that. Maybe being seen to pay for something that claims to make things more secure is more important than actually being more secure.
The lawsuit appears to be about the lack of refunds, and even mentions Delta explicitly declined help from Microsoft and CrowdStrike. So how does that indicate Delta thinks "it's" serious? And what is "it"?
My point is that the first post says that Crowdstrike deserved to go bankrupt, but that is up to their clients to decide. Standards for software are very low, and we all profit from that, so better not rock the boat.
Ok that is an interesting point. But my concern with crowdstrike is that the standard seems so very low (imagine the sort of mishaps Mr Bean might have if he moved into the cybersecurity field and you're not far off) that something other than the quality of the software must be driving things. Compliance tickboxing perhaps?
Apple products are expensive. Assuming most people inside an Apple store can afford them, they will be wealthier than the average, which means they will be better dressed, groomed, and will generally take better care of themselves than the average.
Do people really care about this that much? The European company that made my car probably uses its social media and ad presence to spread progressivism, which I’m completely against, but what are we supposed to do, find and buy only from companies that we identify with politically? That would be very hard and limiting. And somewhat stupid too (as stupid as a car company taking a political stance, or people that think that buying from some company means you identify with their politics, but here we are!)
Do people care that one of the most powerful men in the world has become an enthusiastic cheerleader for the ignorant beliefs and dangerous rhetoric that led to the deadliest war in human history?
Why? I'm sure the CEOs of most big companies we all give money to daily are evil people. Even if not, I'm sure some of their senior management, or even their janitor is a horrible person.
This is the same confusion I have when someone decides to boycott a movie based on an actor. It's very likely some of the hundreds of people who make most movies are awful too, it's entirely futile.
To what extent? If you find out that a second camera operator in 200 odd films was a child molester, would you then make a point to avoid all of their prior films? If you found out someone who worked the production line of your favourite chocolate was a neo nazi, would you stop eating that chocolate?
We only seem to care when the person who is bad is also famous. I think everyone else is just as apathetic, but deludes themselves. I promise you that most things you own or use have some tier of evil within them. People buy cheap clothes, slave made phones and all sorts of things all the time and elect to ignore the imorality of it.
If you think "progressivism" is somehow on equal footing as one of the worst genocides in history then you are morally bankrupt. Several of my family died under the Nazi regime, and I'm not even Jewish or other Untermensch group. This is not unusual in Europe. There's a reason purchases dropped off a cliff after the Sieg Heil specifically, and not before when he merely had some questionable politics.
Maybe it’s the fault of my US centric education, but I must be forgetting that part of Europe that had a fun time during WWII. Even the Swiss spent the time preparing for the other shoe to drop.
Virtually everywhere in Europe, broadly defined, was either directly involved in WW2 or was severely impacted by it while not technically being a combatant.
It shipped in the release version but was disabled according to a note on Wikipedia.
> Microsoft disabled the AARD code for the final release of Windows 3.1, but did not remove it so it could be later reactivated by the change of a single byte.
IIRC it did manage to make it into the PCs of some users - testers and early adopters?
Google Photos, which comes installed by default on all Android phones, sends notifications asking you to print an album with your photos through a partner.
Google Photos is the gallery app that comes with Android phones. Sometimes you will get notifications asking you to buy a printed, real life photo album with the photos that you have in your phone. That album is sold through a partner, which makes this an ad. It’s not upselling you on something you already purchased. It’s telling you to buy a photo album with the photos you took using your phone.
My point is that skeuomorphically that app is my photo album. So it's not a shocking place to have an ad. Whereas getting an ad in my wallet is a whole different kettle of fish.
