Then the few people who don’t are very prolific commenters because it’s a mistake I see often.

Just because this is a common enough mistake, I’m going to publicly correct you for the benefit of other people who might see this comment. I apologize.

It’s Martial Law. Not Marshall Law.

Maim America, Grift Americans

But then wouldn’t it be easier for those software engineers to just deploy it themselves and keep all the money? What value is the buyer providing?

What is meant by Ransomware as a Service, as opposed to regular old Ransomware?

I came here to say this. If I have only a 7% chance of recovering my data after paying, I’m better off not paying.

It’s like this with any controversial issue: most people adopt a manicheist stance, regardless of which side they’re on. This is why I think it’s important to always remember that if these issues weren’t nuanced, they wouldn’t be so controversial among so many different sectors of society.

We can agree on that (that this is the legislators’ reasoning). Whether it’s good or even valid reasoning remains to be seen. For one thing, the alternative to an adoption is one more parentless orphan - which is often also the alternative to an abortion. Oversimplifying the issue helps nobody. I’m not accusing you specifically of oversimplifying, as you made it clear that you were pointing out an oversimplification made by others.

That depends on how you define a human, and there’s the entirely separate issue of whether it being human or not should be the deciding factor. For example, a braindead human is still human but killing them is quite different from killing a healthy human. Oversimplifying the issue helps nobody.

That slash you used implies that the things before and after it are somehow equivalent when they absolutely aren’t.

So they only share when you click on an ad. I use an adblocker anyway, so effectively they’re not sharing anything. Or do I misunderstand?

Google can suck the shit directly from my asshole Human Centipede style if they think I’m ever going to pay them for.not using their monopoly to harass me. When I can no longer feasibly block ads on YouTube, I’ll just move to another platform. Thank goodness they’re about to lose Chrome because otherwise they’d soon be injecting ads directly through the browser just like they do in their shitty news app.

I think they meant that the problem can be solved by people not being dicks and going out of their way to ruin someone’s life just because they don’t approve of what that person puts in their body.

As opposed to drugs like crack cocaine which actually will ruin your life, so if you use it, you’ll have problems that can’t be solved.

Congratulations. I give you a 9/10 in condescension.

You didn’t read the article, did you? It’s not about reading tomes but books. Doesn’t matter if it’s an e-book or a really long slideshow on TikTok. These kids have never read the entirety of the text which is ordinarily contained in a single tome regardless of the format in which they didn’t read it. If you don’t understand why this is alarming, odds are you haven’t either. And considering you didn’t even read the article…

If you can’t explain something in simple terms, that means you don’t understand it yourself. Which is why you’re being so needlessly aggressive and throwing accusations in the first place. It’s because you have such a tenuous grasp on your own theoretical framework that you feel threatened by anyone displaying an opinion that seems to contradict it. You don’t care about righting wrongs, about teaching or even about learning yourself. You only care about protecting your own fragile worldview.

To remedy this, I suggest you open yourself more to diverging opinions - not really in order to change your mind on anything in particular, but because if you only reinforce your current beliefs you’ll miss the forest for the trees. You can actually learn more about your own ideology by studying others and contrasting them.

There, one simple paragraph explaining the problem in terms even a child could understand and another simple paragraph suggesting an actionable solution to that problem, all devoid of aggression and without fake quotations. This is how an adult deals with a misinformed opinion online. I hope this example serves you well in the future.

And your comment lacks anything of substance that could point me in the right direction if you were right.

The people who make it a problem to wear the same dress twice are at fault. #NotAllWomen #NoMenAtAll

The point is that when the phrase “male privilege” is used, it carries the implication that the patriarchy is responsible. But in this particular case, women have 100% of the power to make the problem go away and men have 0%. Calling it “male privilege” is counterproductive if you actually want to solve the problem rather than just complain about it.

[Citation needed.]

Rotated 180 degrees.