- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
If we can convince the ignorant masses to stop buying based on consumerism and purchase based on well informed decisions instead then we would see a shift in enshittification or at least have alternatives. But that’s very unlikely since it’s easier to conform and fall in line and accept your fate.
We need to mandate interoperability and open protocols (as we did with all our other communication media prior) to avoid the siloing of users in captured commercial ecosystems.
It also expects that people are content to actually fix things, or sew tears in clothing, or whatever, and that often requires a little research and initiative in a world where it’s been made abundantly cheap and convenient to just replace almost everything.
I don’t think it’s necessarily ignorance so much as a combination of laziness and incredible convenience.
A few years ago I taught myself to fix my laptop screen via Youtube and saved myself a $400 repair, but most people would just chuck it and buy a new one.
I thought this for a long time. However currently I am no longer convinced. The production is so far decoupled from the consumer and often investor (or otherwise) dependant. So the consumer doesn’t really necessarily have the chance to support a good company nor do good things need to be offered.
I short: eat the rich and reform the stock market.
It’s long time propaganda pushing the fault to the consumer (e. G. Footprint invented. By oil companies)
Yes, yes, yes.
And drastically reform or reimagine all the IP laws.
Copyright: 5 years, one optional 5 year extension.
Patents: 5 years, no extensions. No business methods, no algorithms, no gene expressions.
Owned only by the individual humans and groups of humans. Cannot be owned by trusts, funds, corporations, estates. Cannot outlive the last human owner in a group.
All licensing is non-exclusive only! All licensing is irreversible (once you license out the patent non-exclusively, no way to halt midway through the licensing term).
That way pattents cannot be hoarded by the patent troll entities. Since all exclusive agreements are forbidden, no way to corner the market! Inventors are free to license their inventions all over and cannot be strong armed into an exclusive deal.
In other words, ownerships, paywalls, and corporate control must be severely curtailed.
Think of how much people whine about printer ink without A) looking for alternatives and B) questioning why their printer was fucking free (with rebate).
I got off the inkjet bandwagon almost 30 years ago now. All it takes is doing the math; most print jobs can be done on a compact laser printer, and the ones that can’t can be sent to a print shop for same-day printing, and I still come out ahead, even with binding included.
If you didn’t already hear it, Cory Doctorow recently gave a talk about this at 39C3, the Chaos Computer Club conference. Search “A post-American, enshittification-resistant internet” in your frontend of choice
This is a tricky debate, with mostly religious and traditionalist people on one side, and people against unnecessary surgical procedures on the other. Either way, I think once the foreskin is removed, it should be treated as medical waste.
Nono, you’re thinking of circumcision. This is about a big meeting where furries celebrate their favorite animes or something
Nono, you’re thinking of a convention. This is about a psychological treatment that makes gay men like women.
The other user’s was better, so I’m hiding this one
spoiler
Nono, you’re thinking of conversion therapy. This is about going to a priest to tell them about your sins
Ah yes, I think we all remember the moment back in 2016 when Apple famously announced the removal of the foreskin from the iPhone 7.
You just knew it was the first step in getting rid of the headphone jack… and it made the mens line at the Apple Store, ironically, very long
to be fair, wireless headphones are handy. the wire itself is an annoyance. i’m glad its gone, for the most part. But physical media being gone and evertything being replaced with someones computer in the cloud… its stupid. and more expensive. i don’t like it.
I believe credit for the first occurrence goes back to Ferdinand Magellan. Although he himself did not have the procedure, his crew did after his death in 1521.
I think you accidentally posted this on the wrong thread, but it’s fine because I know exactly the thread you meant, and the word circumvention didn’t help the situation :D
At first I thought the title said, “Let’s end Anti-Circumcision”. I was like, “why?”.
I read that as
Let’s end anti circumsicion!
And got confused fast
I read it as “Let’s end anti-consumerism” and thought “Well that’s a brave thing to post on Lemmy of all places”
😭😭 SAME whats wrong w me 😭😂😂
Ironically I’ve just uninstalled the guardian app because it wouldn’t let me circumvent the number of articles I could read per month.
Bosch is coming out with modular devices that are DMCA locked. I think a a coffee machine from the recent ces
Government officials are really scared of changing the status quo. They’re really afraid that if they get rid of anti-circumvention laws, that they’ll become a pariah state. In the past that probably would have been true. The US would have thrown its weight around, and Europe would have fallen in line and boycotted whoever it was. Many countries also have a lot of Hollywood productions made there. The major Hollywood studios care about anti-circumvention because they think it guarantees their profits. So, if these countries scaled back anti-circumvention, Hollywood would probably throw a fit and cut them off too. Even if the economic impact of getting rid of anti-circumvention were a huge positive, Hollywood has a big cultural impact worldwide.
I’d like to see it happen, but I think the most likely scenario is that a country that already doesn’t fully respect US copyright laws, like Switzerland or Singapore, might take an additional step and stop respecting anti-circumvention.
