admin

joined 2 years ago
[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 7 points 1 week ago

Problem, possibly. Just not because of enshitification, since that has a very specific meaning.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 3 points 1 week ago

As much as they are making an asshat of themselves here, I fail to see how that's relevant.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

So are you starting to see the issue here, or do you think that my bike is an online platform?

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 40 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)

Do you really think that's the definition of that term? "something that no longer works"?

By that logic, my bike has been enshitified because it has a flat tire.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Sincerely, what did you expect? I mean, obviously it's hyped right now, but let's be real - AI is not going to go away anymore.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't want to poop on your well phrased comment, because I do agree.

But all I can think is "Oh nooooo! Poor Disney! Someone should give the multi billion dollar company a hug!"

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

So on topic of the original article:

Nobody is watching the Star Wars sequel trilogy — and that's a problem

Can anybody else who read the article explain to me what "the problem" is? Because I don't see it.

To me it seems more like a light at the end of the tunnel - that maybe we'll get out of the nostalgia fad (and probably straight into the next fad).

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Boomers. As in, people born in the babyboom after the second World War.

You're saying you know more eighty year olds that aren't grandparents, than those that are?

I guess that could be true. But it just goes to show that n=1 is a terrible sample size.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, given everything that's come out, I don't even know what star wars fan would mean nowadays, but I'd be pretty insulted if someone did call me one.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 5 points 1 month ago

I dunno, I was fine with GNU Image Manipulation Program.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I guess his flavour of tainment just doesn't jam well with me. Like I said, it's not the subject matter, but the content just feels needlessly padded. Compare this to videos by Tom Scott, CGP Grey, Matt Parker, Steve Mould, etc. Those videos are far more dense with content It reminds me of how mythbusters gets so much better once you take out the narrator and the endless recaps..

Regarding clickbait - to me a title this one is just another symptom of that disregard for the viewers time. Being coy and mysterious about the subject matter to lure people in. And yeah, hat's probably why it works.

I agree that the production values are incredibly high. But I just can't stand being treated like a simpleton who needs drama to be tricked into watching videos, it feels very patronising.

[–] admin@lemmy.my-box.dev 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (7 children)

I feel the same way. I feel like I would love his subject matters he picks, but he's being so disrespectful of the viewers time that I can't stand it. Just the clickbait title alone is enough to put me off.

 

In a blog post released on Monday, VP of Privacy Sandbox Anthony Chavez said that Google is “proposing an updated approach that elevates user choice” by allowing users to select whether or not they want to enable cookies on Chrome and adjust that choice “at any time.”

“Instead of deprecating third-party cookies, we would introduce a new experience in Chrome that lets people make an informed choice that applies across their web browsing,” Chavez wrote.

view more: next ›