I am addressing the journalist's claims (starting even in the subhead), which is pertinent. If sexists don't like it and are looking for excuses, that's their problem.
Extorting and profiting from private information is not sexist. Pretending that it is something that happens to women because they are women, that it doesn't happen to men, or that only men do it, is sexist.
Wow, so many hoaxes and bullshit for such a short comment.
That seems quite reasonable. Even leaving aside the propaganda, they cannot recognize what they have lost if they do not remember it.
Moreover, in the case of female mutilation, it is also mostly approved and advocated by women.
too killed women and children
Frequently this shit is said I always wonder, are women equivalent to children, is it okay to kill men, or both?
Fair enough, but it should also be noted that this is not a recent problem.
It remains to be seen, but you will probably make the switch without knowing or being able to tell the difference.
Eventually who knows, maybe "your" money will expire, can only be used on certain products, or whatever the real owners want.
PS: Just a meme to joke, if you want to analyze, please don't point at me.
The study may help settle a long-standing debate about the existence of reliable sex differences in the brain.
How many studies on these lines must appear before this "debate" is overcome? It is even a truism! That we are a tabula rasa without sexual dimorphism is as absurd as biological determinism.
It would be ideal, but this is not something that can be solved with votes and protests. If I were in their shoes, I certainly wouldn't be the brave one who would give his life to rebel against tyranny.
It's not their responsibility either, they just had the bad luck to be born there.
They didn't kick out that minority who ran racist businesses, they kicked out all the 288k people who reneged on their "duty" to go kill ukrainians and die for putin's aspirations.
Don't misinterpret this as a slight to the main topic, but I am unable to imagine 110 people living together in one house.
I wonder how many of them (for both sides) were involuntarily recruited.
Yep, I guess the covid made it a visceral, identitarian issue. They're not good allies, but hey, if they have to be alienated, it's a reassurance that they're on the right side.
If you manage to argue long and hard with those crazy extremists (not with the ignorant ones) and not lose your temper, you should be sanctified 😅
Being confrontational will only alienate them from your position and be counterproductive for everyone. Better to just share info that is simple and friendly enough; my favorite is this video: Kurzgesagt: The Side Effects of Vaccines - How High is the Risk?
If the user base is signal's big draw, I'm afraid we're screwed with such a tiny one against those titans.
Signal users are far more likely to need to use whatsapp than the other way around, and migrating to signal is a huge loss with not very popular gains. I don't see how it could compete on a level playing field, but that's where the opportunity to eliminate signal's huge disadvantage comes in.
You could go on without doing it. I would like to use signal to signal, but there are literally zero people interested in my environment :-(
Using signal just me would be much better than using whatsapp directly, and would reduce the data collected.
If signal suddenly stopped being mostly a geek desert and people could still talk to all their contacts, don't you think they would be much more willing to move? The more people, the more people interested in migrating, and the less data for meta.
This is what I hate most about the privacy community, too fanatical and purist to allow extremely useful optional features that would allow them to reach more people.
