from the you-said-it dept
Actually let’s run with that idea, say the internet is Disneyland, would you as a parent take your kids to the entrance, pay the fee and then pat them on the back and say ‘I’m headed off to do something else, have fun on your own’? Or would just about anyone look at someone like that and immediately think ‘That is a horrible parent for just abandoning their kid like that’, even if the place filled with strangers is supposed to be ‘kid friendly’?
‘I can’t be bothered to act like a parent to my kid so it’s everyone else’s job to keep them from anything I might find objectionable’ is not an acceptable justification to insist that everyone else pick up the slack. If you don’t think you can do the job of a parent or you’re not willing to don’t have kids, and if that’s already passed then look for resources to help you be a better parent, don’t expect or demand everyone else cover for you.
In second place, it’s an anonymous comment about the Texas social media law that tries to prevent platforms from exiting Texas:
Texas proposes a law that, for some reason, McDonalds doesn’t like. McDonalds says that if that law passes, it will close all of its Texas stores. Texas adds a provision to the law that makes it illegal for all fast food chains to close their Texas stores, and passes the law.
Does Texas have the power to do this? If they do, that’s both silly and scary at the same time. If they don’t, then why would they have the power to do something similar to Twitter?
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with an anonymous comment about the WarnerMedia/Discovery merger and the deluge of layoffs that follow every megamerger despite the standard promises that this won’t happen:
Some Accounting 101 if anyone needs it: The #1 cost for a company is cost of inventory, #2 is payroll. These are the immutable and inescapable laws of business. Everything else is a distant 3rd or lower.
This means that any time an executive claims there will be cost savings from a merger, they mean layoffs. There is no other way.
In as few words as possible
Linux world laughs at you for suggesting this. Windows world eyes you skeptically. Apple just tells you to get the fuck out.
Who at EA thought this was a good idea?
I’ve said it before, I say it again: If you want anti-cheat tools? Run them server side. Or make them otherwise optional for leaderboards or what not.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is Flakbait with a comment on our post about the content moderation blunder in which a lawyer was suspended from Twitter for quoting The Princess Bride:
Buttercup: But Westley, what about the C.M.A.S.s?
Westley: Content Moderation At Scale? I don’t think it exists.
In second place, it’s Michael with a comment about the FDA manufacturing a sensation around “NyQuil chicken”:
I don’t know what the noise is all about
Dayquil chicken is better.
You must be this tall
So we should restrict Internet content by height? Why not? Makes about the same sense.
Finally, it’s Eldakka with another comment about EA’s terrible anti-cheating plan, and specifically the FAQ explaining the many rules it can enforce, which was written by game security director Elise Murphy:
Would that make them Murphy’s Laws?
That’s all for this week, folks!