![](/static/61a827a1/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
I’m sorry you are getting downvoted, because technically you are right. TikTok will never claim to aim at children or advertise as such because they know they can’t provide a safe environment and will open themselves up to lawsuits.
I’m sorry you are getting downvoted, because technically you are right. TikTok will never claim to aim at children or advertise as such because they know they can’t provide a safe environment and will open themselves up to lawsuits.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by that as a response to my post?
That is not at all what i am saying at all. That’s the second one on this topic to twist my words to fit what they think is the kind of person I am. If you want to read negatively you’ll find it everywhere.
Let me state the obvious here. People who are in this situation have to make some tough decisions. I know it sucks, I have friends who went through this and yet I can’t even begin to imagine how tough it gets first hand. It does drastically change their lives for the better, but it has consequences. They lose family, they lose friends, and in case of the subject at hand they might lose their job too.
That sucks, but for the vast majority it’s still worth it big time in order to be yourself.
Also, what you are saying applies to the individual. For the government, and for things such as these sporting events, they will not ‘be’ female until they undergo their transformation.
Of course that’s not what I mean. You’re missing the entire point of my post because of the way I describe the moment of the procedure itself.
Sometimes you make a decision in life that affects your future in a meaningful way. Becoming a trans is one of those things. Sadly there’s no good solution to the problem it causes in sports right now so the only possible answer is to not have them in the competition.
They are not saying to leave them behind, and comparing this to not participating in life is an unfair exaggeration. The situation is far too complicated for that. It’s not just about politics here, there’s other people involved that would be put at a disadvantage, others that would abuse the situation to gain money, etc.
And yes, I’m well aware of the injustice being done to trans people on every possible level, and that needs to change, this battle itself though is just not the same.
*Edit: I’m reading further down that this “problem” it causes might not be as big as I heard it was in the media. So take this comment with that in mind if you will. It only proves the complexity of the issue though.
I don’t think trying to control is the best way of looking at it. There’s a hive mind about the fediverse that has a purpose, that wants to protect it as part of the identity of it. So a collective of instances banding together to keep that intact seems right up its alley.
Selfishness is part of the human condition. Tribes needed to fight over resources and mark their territory in order to keep the tribe alive. It’s in your instinct.
There have always been borders and territories, and there have always been fights and wars over it.
I don’t really see how your “if you don’t use it” policy applies here, and I also think the problem of this topic is easier than that.
Would you rather everyone can just walk into your house and take whatever they want? I for one am quite happy with the rules and morals we keep.
Those flags put up are often there to keep different cultures with different rules apart. It’s not as easy as erasing borders to have a free world. People are too selfish for that.
Sure, governments still steal all the time. Things are definitely not perfect, but that’s not related to someone stealing your lighter.
Why? Who made the rules about exchanging data? And it is an exchange of data for a service, it’s just not as obvious as you might want it to be. But nothing comes for free.
Hey I’m not saying I like the big company ethic scathing that’s been going on around the world, but it is how our society currently works.
They are. They provide you with a service for your data. It’s called YouTube. And if they don’t have a place to show you ads, the data is useless because no one will use it. It’s a closed loop.
And even if you don’t agree with it, it’s still a company selling a service and it can do whatever it wants to earn money from it. There’s nothing unethical about that.
Hell yeah they should, I’m not disputing that, but there’s so many here pretending like it’s somehow unethical for Google to fight against ad blockers, and I am arguing that.
Google’s main source of income is ads across the board, so fighting adblockers is certainly in their best interest
That’s fair
So because they earn money somewhere else they should do something else for free? Why? What does Google owe us?
They only have the monopoly if we give it to them. I find their model fair, I use their service a lot. if they overprice me I’ll find another form of entertainment.
But you are right, people see YouTube as a necessity at this point. I’m trying to remind you, it’s not.
Yes, thank you! I’ve been downvoted previously in a topic similar to this one. I know change can be hard for some people but we always knew this would come sooner or later. A huge company wants to make money off their service and people here act as if it’s their right to find a way around it. It’s not. You were just lucky that there was one. Either find other entertainment or accept that you will get ads.
How is it immoral? Is Google morally obligated to provide you with a way to use their service for free? Google wants YouTube to start making money, and I’d guess the alternative is no more YouTube.
Why is everyone so worked up about a huge company wanting to earn even more money, we know this is how it works, and we always knew this was coming. You tried to cheat the system and they’ve had enough.
So you raise an argument, I respond by telling you it’s not the main argument I’m seeing itt, and your response is to point back at your singular comment?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you 100%, but most people here are just mad they can’t get YT for free as easily anymore.
Yes, as is the right of the company as it’s their service. People pretend it’s unfair for Google to monetise YT and they should get access to YT unrestricted just because they found a way to use add blockers. Yt is free to try and monetise their service as good as they can, whether we like it or not
I’d guess that’s sooner than needed and that means more waste