Because I’m not allowed to read the article to know if this is mentioned: a big reason why this would aggravate Wukong fans is that Nintendo is a Japanese company.
If you are asked about bad reviews directly, you can’t exactly ‘no comment’ them. His response is basically ‘it’s not a conventional film’ is a perfectly reasonable one, I think.
Damn, I have to go hunting, I didn't know a new season had come out so my DVR isn't set, I hope season 3 sticks to being more like season 1 or the second half of season 2, I didn't care for what felt like a change in tone away from the Alien aspect in the first half of season 2.
I've enjoyed her work in Resident Alien, she was also really good in Chuck.
This whole subscription/rental economy I keep seeing is one of the biggest changes in the last few decades. If anything is pushing us further into a truly class based society of owners and the rest of you it is this.
I know that quote sounds great like that, except it’s an out of context (and is actually “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy”) clip from a speech given by a Danish politician. He was proposing a world in which everyone shares through services that loan the items in your house that you’re not using and then services them for free. It was an idea to help cut down on waste.
Why would you not be using things in your house? Because in this imagined future, everything will essentially be done for you and you don’t need things like stovetops all the time.
The only irony of “you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy” is that an indictment of runaway capitalism is now used to describe runaway capitalism.
More importantly, she offered it up as a thought experiment about the way things are going. She proposed it as neither a good nor bad thing, even in the story saying there were some people who rejected it outright, nor a solution to anything. She was just imagining a world where this type of thing occurred.
The mark of an educated mind is the ability to entertain an idea without accepting it. People are so thoughtless that you can’t even think about something without being accused of espousing it.
That’s because posts are not just thoughts in your head. You are selecting the particular thought you want to publish on here. You are promoting it.
Very few people are “just saying” or “just asking questions”. Usually those are just rhetorical devices for introducing unpopular ideas that would be rejected otherwise.
Sure, of course, it’s an idea you want to talk about. This isn’t the same as saying you think whatever you want to talk about has to go one way or another. Even in the thought experiment itself, there were people who dissent, although they don’t play a prominent role in the story at all.
And also let’s keep in mind that this was some blog post by an individual contributor, not some official statement by the wef.
But I present my ideas with an open mind all the time. I’m rarely sold on my first thought, I’ll float the idea, and often will outright dismiss it quickly. The idea that if I promote an idea I want to talk about, even if I’m giving what my initial desire is for it, means I’m sold on that position, seems very foreign to me. It seems so crippling… Like how do you collaborate on anything if any idea you put forward is treated as the be all end all?
Read Richard Stallman and see that all this is nothing new. Repeat the mantra: You will have nothing and you will be “happy.” Mass surveillance is acceptable after all I have nothing to hide.
But not only were they illegal, like debuggers—you could not install one if you had one, without knowing your computer’s root password. And neither the FBI nor Microsoft Support would tell you that.
Hello! While I understand why you might think that, I can assure you that I am not an AI like ChatGPT. I’m programmed to generate responses based on the prompts given to me. However, I don’t have any awareness or consciousness like humans do. If you have any questions or need help with something, feel free to ask!
Ownership of games is a pretty reasonable interpretation in this context. How can ownership of games exist in a context of digital access, activation, online requirements and no physical media?
businessinsider.com
Aktywne