Anyone who can look at the news and not understand never will.

We’re past the time of understanding the situation is my point. It’s time to riot.

And quibilling about how accurate a metaphor is at any given time is just as useful?

Let me try this.

It doesn’t matter if the metaphor doesn’t stay consistent or whatever.

Because anyone who would be swayed by a metaphor like that is already swayed. It’s time to get in the streets.

That’s not what a metaphor is?

It’s an analogy, not a script. Of course it’s not a perfect fit. Metaphors never do. And of course it changes and life itself changes.

Your getting mad about a metaphor when you should be getting mad about facsim itself. Getting mad at nothing is just distraction.

So what’s your point then. That the may be fascist but the Hitler comparisons are a line to far for you?

Okay,

They’re still fascist as fuck.

From your own wiki link

robots.txt is the filename used for implementing the Robots Exclusion Protocol, a standard used by websites to indicate to visiting web crawlers and other web robots which portions of the website they are allowed to visit.

How is fedidb not an “other web robot”?

Robots.txt started I’m 1994.

It’s been a consensus for decades.

Why throw it out and replace it with imied consent to scrape?

That’s why I said legally there’s nothing they can do. If people want to scrape it they can and will.

This is strictly about consent. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should yes?

I guess I haven’t read a convincing argument yet why robots.txt should be ignored.

Why invent implied consent when complicit explicit has been the standard in robots.txt for ages now?

Legally speaking there’s nothing they can do. But this is about consent, not legality. So why use implied?

Canadian here, most of Europe. We’re looking like we’re expecting Trump lite this year. Not to mention Harper was, a lot.

And if my grandma had wheels she’d be a bicycle.

If it’s disadvantageous to the money in control of it, it won’t happen.

Sure, I don’t think any disagrees that there’s side effects that aren’t good for anyone, never mind teens.

But there’s nothing that you’ve written that’s specific to Tik Tok. It’s not substantially worse than American alternatives. Facebook has known for years the negative effect, study after study has come out. What legislation was passed to protect that?

So why target Tik Tok specifically?

Tik Tok is the only tencent company I know if that’s been labeled a national security risk.

Tik Tok is what they’re referring to

A) I thought it was up to individuals not groups.

B) we can’t even get people to agree the earth is round. You really expect to be able to change individual habits?

So you honestly believe the largest polluters will just stop polluting if consumers change habits?

Because like I cited, the vast majority of pollution comes from corporations. Not people.

Because even if all individuals stopped polluting today magically, it still wouldn’t be enough.

Take that energy you’re using to hold individuals accountable and hold those actually polluting accountable.

EDIT

You seem to want to blame anyone but yourself so you can remain comfortable and do nothing at all to help.

You seem to be holding everyone but the organizations that are actually polluting.

I refuse to put the blame on individuals for climate change 100 companies are responsible for 71% of emissions

https://amp.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

There are plenty of things for individual things people can do, but the responsibility rests on corporations for this mess. And it can’t be individuals to clean it up.

And before someone starts saying that corporations only driven by individual consumerism, what other choice do we have? They literally make things to break more.

It’s just greed at the end of the day.