Tell me you don’t understand language and simultaneously logic without telling me
For all your whining about nuance, you sure love to take the most reductionist (straw-manned) interpretation of things and come out of the gate swinging with insults. Excuse me while I use this to justify dismissing your pedantry.
Mmm, beg to differ. Your whole position is tedious and pedantic.
It’s all anecdotal, folks.
I won’t vote for Trump, I just don’t like having to eat a shit pie and being told it’s french silk caramel, and if I say otherwise I’m Republican, Uneducated, or something else equally insulting.
I’m not saying “they changed the definition”. I’m saying “too many things about the way this term is gatekept from general use are flawed, and done for political gain sometimes, the average discussion of what is happening right now being one of them”. It depends on the context whether a more academic definition standard should be expected, and even then it’s not as straightforward as whoever is trying to shut down its use likes to pretend, and so perhaps a less-important hill to die on than whatever discussion is happening at that point in time."
OP is _ _________ ____ ___ _ _______ ____
lmao, I’m Mexican. Pointing out the last name is Mexican being the reason it’s the same for both of them in a silly way doesn’t make it racist. It makes sense that we try to be watchful of actual racism, but it also makes sense to not go overboard, we lose support, sow division, and waste energy that way
Just because you’ve adapted to the lies doesn’t make them ok, nor the best version of what is possible
Negative hype can kill a product that could have been good.
Positive false hype can deceive people into wasting money.
Sure, complete honesty would be ideal, but if you say “well it sucks right now but we promise it will be ok when you buy it”, not many people would rush to order one.
And they shouldn’t. It’s just another way of saying “people acting rationally based on truthful information”
Many good products never made it to market because of insufficiently good perception.
That should be a separate issue. It’s not the only available path, just one often taken because it’s the most forgiving of shoddy business practices, doesn’t justify its existence, either.
On the flip side, creating positive hype out of smoke and mirrors can be used to kill a competitor’s product for no good reason, so it’s not quite ok either.
I think people are starting to realize the depth of corporate deception and bad-faith practices and how that affects everyone at large, and so they’re rightly tired of them and trying to reset it all back to simple, effective, and fair ethical standards.
Jobs: Ass
Apple: Ass
Engineers: overworked
Mexicans gonna mex
source: déjame en paz, güey
stg democrats are trying so fucking hard to cause a schism party
yeah, hiring her as his assistant isn’t ideal as the risk to the company, but in terms of nepotism, it doesn’t sound as bad to me as the CEOs that will make someone a director over an entire department just because they’re banging (have seen this irl)
Removed by mod
Kentucky Yeeted Salmon
whines about reductionist rhetoric, uses insanely reductionist example
trash site
it is disproportionately men causing it
citation needed
Legacy comment.