Of course, the creator has an interest to show this data to the advertisers if they have a good audience retention during these sponsored segments. The creators that want to hide this probably can be assumed to have a worse retention… So the advertisers can just ask for the data and know how much money that ad space is worth, and make decent estimates even when the creator refuses to share that data.
In the end, that data may very well influence how much the creator receives.
The creators sell adventisement space and want the advertisers to know that their channel is a good investment, so the more they can prove to the advertisers that their sponsor segments arent skipped, the more they can charge for it.
A reform that faces backlash and, by the force of collective movements, overcomes backlash and capitalist resistance, is a form of revolution. I think such movements may lead to socialism, or other things (better or worse).
Edit: who is downvoting me speak your mind, im curious… I know what i said doesnt sound like most leninist discourse, but in practice im not sure how they differ.
I guess it’s fine then
I get that sometimes there is implied context. But at this point we are guessing what her argument is… some guess the argument is just “it grew there naturally so it must be supposed to be there” and you should be able to replace “it” with anything, while other people like you guess that its implied that “it” shouldnt be replaced with things that grow aberrantly. The analogy dinogatorr makes is fine for critiquing the first ‘unrefined’ argument that we see a lot of people make all the time. We could use “implied” context to dismiss any pointing out of flawed logic leading to good conclusions (you need to swap the objects for that, i suppose).
Right… but analogies use simplifications. The only thing perfectly analogous to A is A itself. So to make an analogy between A and B, I need to simplify both to the point where the differences disappear. What was your point?
No argument about things being “supposed to” exist is gonna seriously be good or make sense with pure logic… dont you need to lean on religion to argue stuff like this?
Its annoying that people complain about analogies like that. “youre comparing the good thing A to the bad thing B?? How dare you?” Its just an analogy to make a point, noone was arguing that A was bad or that B was good…
I think thats exactly what the person youre responding to meant.
Im also not sure what they meant… I actually read it differently the first time… like clippy being a voice of western media, equating not handing arms to Israel with it’s destruction. Just like they equate asking for the end of genocide with antisemitism.
From every part of the world…
Looking at footage is among the weakest arguments against flat earth tbh
State ≠ people
I never understood how a statistical word-predicting model was expected to be obedient in the first place… of course we can train the model to say yes rather than no to command-sounding phrases, but thats a rather shallow mechanism.
What if the gov has access to both tor nodes, cloudfare infrastructure and mozilla servers?
totally. I recently read a book i was supposed to have read in school, and really liked it. I probably would have liked it at that age, but couldnt really sit through it.
Also the sturdier machines are heavier, take up more space in tiny appartments, and consume more power. I was looking for juicers the other day and deciding between an industrial one and a cheap plastic one. THe industrial one was enormous and used 700W, while the cheap one used like 25W. THe industrial one wasnt even that much expensive, like 2-3x the price of the cheap one, but would take up much more space in my kitchen.
Theres something about homework that can make anything insufferable.
There is political strength in doing it like the last line said and using the established franchise.