Okay man, believe what you want to believe. I’ve already wasted enough time on you.

There is absolutely nothing I could show you that could change your mind. You phrased your original comment as a good faith question, but in reality you were trying to give yourself ammunition to attack me with.

Your take isn’t even rational. If I thought there was any chance of you changing your mind, I would go through your comment detail by detail showing what arguments you have that are wrong, where you twisted my words, and what claims you avoided.

You’d just respond with more bullshit and more bad faith arguments, until I eventually lost my temper. Arguing with someone like you is a complete waste of time.

Lol, every fucking time. The initial question was in bad faith, the response has misinformation, and there’s always some nonsense moral implication. Yet if I just didn’t respond there would be someone commenting something along the lines how “it’s pretty telling” I don’t engage with this crap.

I feel that this is not an honest question, but an attempt for me to state more concrete positions which you will then attack me for using misinformation and bad faith emotional arguments. I’m guessing it’ll be in the form of going bullet point by bullet point, and then with some witty last sentence implying I’m a bad person or a mossad sock puppet.

I’ll state a few obvious ones, in case I’m wrong

• The phrases “intifadah revolution” and “from river to the sea” are blantant antisemitic dog whistles. They are direct references to previous attempts to destroy Israel and terror attacks on Jews worldwide. Despite this, they are still ultimately accepted in liberal circles
• Liberals repeatedly refer to Israel as a European colonial ethnostate state. This is extremely misleading on multiple aspects. The most notable is 22 percent of the Israeli population is Arab, while the largest ethnic subgroup of Jews are mizrahi Jews.
• I’ve heard the Nakba mentioned a million times, but I never hear discussion about how basically every Arab state forced their entire Jewish population into Israel via violence and ethnic cleansing. Hence the reason for the large Mizrahi Jewish population
• College campuses have handled antisemitism claims with kid gloves, because the antisemitism comes from progressive coded groups. Their response would have been completely different if conservative groups were acting in the same way, or if black, Asian, or queer folks were targeted in a similar manner.

The top comments on this post alternate between blaming Israel, claiming the IDF accidentally killed the hostages and blamed Hamas, and claiming the IDF executed the hostages themselves as a psyop.

There is clearly a huge portion of liberals that have extreme issues when it comes to treating this conflict with any sort of nuance or objectivety. They see the conflict primarily though the lens of the US culture wars, are extremely comfortable with declaring themselves informed after reading a few curated social media posts and watching a John Oliver video, and are extremely confident that anyone who disagrees with them is either morally or intellectually inferior.

That mentality works fine when you’re dealing with straightforward issues like legalizing weed or trans bathroom laws, but completely fails here. Geopolitics in general is extremely complicated, the middle east is a particularly complicated issue for geopolitics, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a particularly complicated issue for the middle east. Despite all this you have people running around with an extreme amount of self assurance that their barely informed zero nuance outlook is unquestionably correct. It’s absolutely insufferable.

Honestly at this point fuschia’s continued existence feels less like “investing in a product that will yield dividends long-term” and more “middle manager desperately trying to justify their job”.

I feel like this is directed towards ICE vs EV cars. If that’s the case, it’s sort of frustrating.

EVs have some very real drawbacks. Even if those drawbacks are solvable problems, they are still problems right now. Pushing this narrative that EVs are universally better or that the biggest hurdle to adoption is irrational consumer sentiment will just make people feel gaslit. It’ll also make people more hesitant to adopt later on, because they’ll be skeptical of positive reviews that are honest.

I get the feeling the part of capitalism Phil Spencer hates is the part where consumers can take their business elsewhere if they don’t like the product.

So I agree with OP on the style of the press release being infuriating.

It seems like a lot of tech releases these days are written for non technical journalists (ie The Verge), “tech influencers”, and cargo cultists. They always read in a way that’s super overhyped to the point where you almost want to be dismissive of the end product as a form of protests.

However the tech seems cool. Between VSCode and GitHub we’ll be seeing a lot of feedback sooner or later.

If all the apps are in React Native I feel like they are gonna have a bad time. If you’re not careful React Native apps have bad performance, and Fire TVs don’t have a lot of performance to spare.

So, as it’s been stated, Wayland is still not universally better than X. There are still bugs in places. Gaming is still an issue. Kwin’s implementation still isn’t complete enough to be reliably introduced as the default.

This is after years and years of work. Yes, making an entirely new display protocol is hard. However Wayland was introduced as the “eventual X replacement” when I was in high school. I’m 30 now. I’ve heard some variation of “Wayland is almost ready” since my senior year of college.

At some point it becomes exhausting. At this point when someone says something along the lines of “in a year or two, Wayland will reach a point where X.org will be a thing of the past” my immediate reaction is to call bullshit.

Investors generally want to get a positive ROI. They don’t want to tank the company to the point where it can be acquired by another company for pennies on the dollar.

Look at Nokia. When they hired a former Microsoft exec, they weren’t expecting him to tank the entire company so it could be acquired by Microsoft.

Honestly if you read the actual email I think there could be significant legal trouble ahead.

Spencer talks about how the main barrier to acquiring Nintendo is that they sit on a mountain of cash. He calls that unfortunate. He then proceeded to state a company with connections to Microsoft had just bought a lot of Nintendo shares, and how they could work with said company to make such an acquisition a reality.

The company in question publicly bought a massive amount of Nintendo shares. They then proceeded to pressure Nintendo to invest more capital instead of sitting on the cash pile they have now. They did this under claims that such a move would be beneficial to Nintendo in terms of ROI. However, it would also result in Nintendo being more vulnerable to an acquisition from Microsoft if any of those bets don’t pay off.

In short, it could be argued that Microsoft worked with investors to tank Nintendo so they could buy it. That’s a huge deal and will probably result in a shitstorm.

I’m surprised Sundar isn’t on the hot seat at this point.

People are gonna be like “oh well he presided over X revenue growth and that’s all investors care about”. Investors also care about future returns.

Under Sundar, Google has more or less completely failed to diversify. They’ve had the advantage on several products, only for them to dick around while their competitors established (or re-established) dominance. The areas where they have market dominance went from “we have the far superior product” to “this Lowkey sucks, but I can’t think of anything better”.

As far as I’m concerned Sundar is Google’s Sculley. Google will go for a long time under its own momentum, but eventually the wheels will come off.

Meanwhile Nadella is getting paid a quarter as much.

Every single civilization with every single type of governance in human history requires most people to work. That will continue to be the case for a long time into the future.

Is the current system perfect? No. However it does allow for a greater degree of latitude than basically everything that came before it. It also has safeguards to ensure there’s some sort of safety net if you fall on hard times.

You also mentioned democracy. Assuming you live in America, you can vote in a way that introduces reform to the system.

Starting a violent revolution is a last resort sort of thing.

I’m honestly just impressed by how much this guy has grown. I remember when he was going on rants about how much he hates atheists.

Be the change you want to see in the world…