They truly believe that any gay symbolism is pushy.
It is in your face, especially during pride month. But that's the point. It's in your face so we can talk about how gay people are treated, what they've overcome, and show that they are being included in places they previously weren't. You can't do that if it's not in your face.
So, they've got a point when they claim that gay symbolism is pushy. I'd ask them why they think it's useful to be pushy.
I hate ads as much as anyone and have been blocking them for almost as long as ad blockers have existed. I still acknowledge the fact that ads are the primary revenue source for a lot of things on the Internet, and I selectively enable them for content I want to pay for.
How do you think Youtube is supposed to survive without ads or subscriptions? When they puts ads on their site, the unsaid agreement is that you exchange your ad views for their service.
I can envision a world where the search bar is an AI prompt. What a time to be alive that will be!
I wonder if we can also browse other peoples' prompts. That would be cool.
The job I'm currently interviewing candidates for has 1800 applicants. I don't want a thread where that many people are talking, answering questions, and trying to get my attention for the job. I want a quick way to work through all the resumes so I can hire the best person.
That's a lot of speculation and zero evidence. Regardless, selfishness and cooperation aren't mutually exclusive.
Most of the anti-capitalism stuff on Lemmy has nothing to do with Capitalism and everything to do with humans being greedy. Anyone who thinks there's a path to evenly distributing the wealth is an idiot because even people who advocate for that will end up finding ways to hoard more wealth for themselves if they get the chance. It's the way we've always been and the way capitalism and socialism always turn out.
If you want to earn enough money to live on, learn a skill and get a better job!
*Learns a skill and gets a better job*
Hey, not like that!
There is nothing communist about that. He's not advocating abolishing private ownership. Businesses and workers both operate in the free market, which allows workers to advocate for their position in the market.
The free market doesn't exist in a communist economy. Communism uses a planned economy, so the government strongly regulates both businesses and workers. This eliminates workers' leverage over employers.
If the only way to defend communism is by claiming that no country has ever done communism correctly, then that's a problem. You can't point to a single successful communist country because there aren't any.
China became far more successful since it abandoned communism for its own flavor of capitalism. Private ownership in China has led to a massive improvement in quality of life for most Chinese residents, and more opportunities for success than ever before.
Meanwhile, most complaints about capitalism have almost nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with laws and regulations or human greed (which is the worst part of any system).
I'm sure google will never pull the same stunt as Amazon. They're the good guys!
Why would they have to keep up with their appraisal? There is no downside to not doing it, other than not being worth as much if they want to sell or IPO, but that would be true even without the equity firm's investment and appraisal. No law says they have to meet the expectations set by a single investor. There is no legal duty requiring a company to maximize profits or shareholder value.
However, even if such a law requiring them to maximize profits existed, it's very reasonable that they would legally continue making the same types of movies that earned them that value in the first place. There couldn't possibly be a requirement for them to change business strategies, else every company would eventually all end up in the same, most profitable industry. They'd all be selling movie theatre popcorn or something.