That’s fine. I will either continue to use adblockers, pay, or stop using the internet outside of what is required to function in society. I already refuse to use anything that has decided to go ad supported without the ability to block ads and has a price I’m not willing to pay.

If small (or large) businesses require the mass collection of personal information by malicious advertisers to exist, then they don’t derserve to exist.

Sometimes they flap their wings!

Yes, OP said all advertising. You mentioned the main problems with ditching all advertising. I added to the conversation with a poasible middle ground that addressed the worst parts.

Targeted advertising, which requires collecting personal information without people’s knowledge, is what makes online advertising the absolute worst kind of advertising. That could be addressed on a way that could allow other less malicious forms to exist.

Any change just for the sake of change will be detrimental to the functionality. Constant change means there is never a point in time where the overall functionality can be reviewed for stability.

The Shitposting argument style is the disruption in online conversations, usually of significant issues of discourse such as political and social issues, by making proofless and inflammatory claims that derail the conversation. The arguments are just reasonable enough that they come across as genuine beliefs and move the conversation to an irrelevant discussion.

Shitposting is just the new name for trolling after trolling was changed to mean online bullying.

A swiping motion and muscle memory for tapping are two different things. It took a while to get fast with my thumbs even though I type fairly fast on a keyboard.

But I would love a TV that is smart enough to auto hide & mute every kind of ad. Even little logos on the athletes’ uniforms.

So, the best part about this example is that it is well intended but would have so many side effects it would be hilarious to see someone try to make it work. My assumption is that you want it to just have regular uniform colors where the ads are now.

The first assumption is that the team logo and colors aren’t advertising. They are! Yeah, they make bank on tickets, but the real money is in merchandising. Merchandising only works because the people associate it with the team, so team uniforms at their core are ads. They weren’t as much in the past when the majority of income was from tickets and concessions, but they are now. An easier version of this example is auto racing, where the car colors and entire paint job is an advertisement with a bunch of smaller ads plastered all over. Would the AI need to recolor all the cars to avoid color based advertising like bright yellow and black for DeWalt?

That also means that other media that exists to prop up sales in other areas are also ads. A lot of cartoons like Transformers, GI Joe, and My Little Pony existed as advertisements for the toys. The best way this gets convoluted is that Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (TMNT) was originally a comic book, which someone thought would be a great starting point for selling toys and to sell the toys they made a cartoon. But then they stopped selling the toys for a while, so the cartoon reruns weren’t really ads at that point in time the same way they were originally. So does the TMNT cartoon always count as an ad because of the intent at the time it was created, or is it only an ad while the thing it is advertising is being sold?

Then you get into the fake ads in movies for things that don’t exist. Are they ads? What about media where a real world thing is part of the plot, like how the military being in a movie is likely to be intended as an ad for the military?

I’m sure the idea is that the AI would know what the user means by ads, but the viewer will always be surprised when things they don’t realize are ads get blocked and it would have to adapt to each individual viewer. Even more fun when multiple people try to watch something and they aren’t on the same page about ads that impact the ability to watch!

I still love the post, but thinking how it could play out even if it worked is kind of funny.

It itches other times, but you are able to address it with a free hand and doesn’t seem like such a big deal.

It is a calendar that shows the repeating cycle of the world’s destruction and rebirth each time the milk runs out.

Oh yeah, and pinky rings!

At least onion rings are honest.

I dunno, doesn’t seem like toe rings and cock follow the same naming convention.

No

They made the Willy Wonka Meth Lab version of Minecraft?

Disliking a suit and tie isn’t some revelation to “normies”. You are not a radical for thinking that. In fact, all the little things that annoy you probably annoy other people too.

So why do we need to go along with it?

PSA = Pirate Service Announcement?

Imagine how many things that you have to do that only exist because of ridiculous social expectations on what someone else thinks is important.

Being different in a way that would work if conformity was less important shouldn’t be a disability.

but then in the recommended section it does not show someone who actually knows shit about fitness and steroids etc how would they know.

It is kind of funny that you think the recommendations would be informative instead of some shill peddling the same “you can do it with 5000 calories and exercise” bullshit. A rabbit hole is going further down the same hole.

It isn’t about people better than you. It is about idealized and generally unrealistic body standards.

The new guidelines, now introduced in the UK and around the world, apply to content that: idealises some physical features over others, such as beauty routines to make your nose look slimmer; idealises fitness or body weights, such as exercise routines that encourage pursuing a certain look; or encourages social aggression, such as physical intimidation.

These are not videos about getting to a healthy weight and exercise routine. “Certain look” is a crappilly phrased way of saying unrealistic body standards, but that is what it means.

The headline does describe the article. The article has more detail about the motivations and nuance of why certain weight and fitness videos are being promoted less to children.

The platform will still allow 13- to 17-year-olds to view the videos, but its algorithms will not push young users down related content “rabbit holes” afterwards.

If they included rabbit hole in the title, it would still be necessary for a lot of people unaware of the term to read the article to find out what that phrase means.