closedgrave

5 ms·

1.
by closedgrave 7y ago
I know this comment is bad... I just want to point out how creepy the look on that guys face is in the graphic where he brings the pear torte to his advisor.
2.
by closedgrave 7y ago
So, I'm curious where this narrative comes from, because I first met "social justice warrior"s in the 90's and they where very much claiming that brand. I mean, they where made fun of but that seemed to validate the &quo
3.
by closedgrave 7y ago
I feel like they could care, but the network effects are so strong, and the negatives are hidden for now. This is because for the most part the people designing and implementing the tech are not classically or obviously "bad" peop
4.
by closedgrave 7y ago
>> refuse to publish their articles for a corporation with such an "immoral" advertising department, >> GGP was basically pushing "we could destroy the village in order to save it" logic." Why do I feel
5.
by closedgrave 7y ago
But the fourth estate existed before the internet super powered predatory ad practices. I get that predatory advertisement was baked in from the beginning for news papers and that a lot of work has been done to mitigate those roots, but I f
6.
by closedgrave 7y ago
> The advertising department makes money for the owners, I may be missing something here but they make money for the reporters as well right? I don't know, if the firewall involves the money as well, my opinion of the authors would
7.
by closedgrave 7y ago
> being two separate entities They aren't really though, they both make money on my privacy with relatively little consent. If that's the bad thing, I'm not sure I care that one of two parties says "sorry, I know thi