The answer is money and eliminating competition for money
The answer is money and eliminating competition for money
It’s an awareness thing. Everyone uses it because everyone else uses it, because it’s the main one people know about, because Meta has unlimited money to market it and scale it, which are exorbitantly expensive.
He only uses it once a week though, so just catch him after his weekly kill
Hey get a load of this guy, can’t even expose one lousy US war crime. He’s basically complicit
Some TVs have tech called ACR (Automatic Content Recognition) that literally reads pixels on the screen for identifying information about what content is being displayed. If your TV has ACR enabled, it’s possible it’s tracking what you watch, even if you’re viewing it through a device like Chromecast.
If your TV doesn’t have ACR or the TV itself isn’t connected to the Internet, then you’re probably fine.
You’re forgetting one important thing - Bezos needs more money! Line must go up. Always. At any cost.
I was a long time subscriber as well, but canceled right before Christmas 2022. I missed it for about a week and then I realized most things I “needed immediately” from Amazon I could either 1) drive across town to purchase from brick and mortar or 2) actually just wait for it.
The end result has been me buying less things I don’t need, and buying the things I do need from local retailers (and of course big box stores), or ordering them from other online retailers since the shipping is comparable to Amazon.
2 years in and I don’t miss it at all, will never go back. I do want to watch the Fallout series though.
To be fair, that fella likely committed a heinous crime such as believing that the earth was not the center of the solar system, or speaking to a wealthy person
Sorry to hear that. Can I interest you in some Taylor Swift gossip or the latest news story about what Elon pooped out of his mouth this morning?
Lately it seems like many Taylor Swift fans would slit someone’s throat for the opportunity to look at a pan that she might have touched one time
Solely? No. But if the airbag, seatbelt, or self-driving autopilot feature that they created contributed to someone’s death, they are partially responsible and should face consequences or punishments. Especially if they market it as a safe feature.
May I ask what expertise you have on this that makes you know more than doctors and psychologists who use the term intrusive thoughts, and specifically use that term to diagnose people with mental illness or neuro-divergence? Or are you just pontificating to feel smarter than everyone else? We don’t need a new word for something everyone (except you) clearly already understands and uses properly.
I think a good term for what you defined in your edit might be “intrusive thoughts”
Both can be nuts
deleted by creator
Steve Jobs is the exception. I’m just trying to answer the original question about why this happens so often. I’m not trying to argue about the best way to run a company. But if you’re equating every founder with Steve Jobs then we’re having a completely different conversation.
Apple is now the most valuable company on earth, so I think you’re not making the point you think you’re making. Publicly traded companies act only based on what increases the value of their shares the most. If the current CEO isn’t seen as the most profitable CEO for the shareholders, they will eventually be replaced, even if they founded the company. That is a risk you knowingly take when taking your company public. Most founders choose the money that comes with an IPO, knowing they’ll eventually get the boot.
Because it requires a completely different skill set to run a startup with only yourself and 50 employees to worry about vs a multi-billion dollar, publicly traded company. People that are good at one of those often aren’t good at the other, so when their company changes from the former to the latter, they get the boot for someone better at running the new version of the company.
Wikipedia as an organization does this?? News to me so I’d love a source on that. I would not be surprised if people that work at Wikipedia donate to charitable causes or speak out about social issues, but that’s a very different thing called free speech
Those scots sure are a contentious people