So many people still think its ok for them to do📱 : memes

[+] [email protected] 104 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 110 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Propro tip: Don’t buy from evilcorp and donate those savings directly to the EFF

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If I'm on Amazon it's for something that I need and can't get locally. There are no saving to donate. I'll probably have to spend a lot more, drive multiple hours, or both if I don't shop on Amazon. That's the only reason I ever use it.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I'm glad someone said this here. It feels vile, being forced to do business with these corporations, but I end up getting bulk couscous (which has been scarce even in single bags or boxes in my rural, deep south community) for my autistic stepson who has very specific dietary needs. I can get very specialized disability equipment there, and it's delivered in two days (which is already two days longer than we can afford to wait, sometimes, but we make do.)

Yes, obviously, be ethical everywhere you can, as often as you can, but a blanket "dOnT dO bUsInEsS wItH eViL" is useless, whereas minimizing harm like with tips for links like this one is very helpful.

It's so insanely privileged. Reminds me of the same keyboard warriors who like to "raise awareness" by pouring ice water on themselves and then doing nothing else, feeling smug they did "something" when their only involvement with our causes is posting smug one-liners on the internet, or, of they're feeling particularly "helpful," changing their profile picture to reflect someone else's cause.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hi. Autistic adult here. I‘m sorry you have to go through this and get triggered by these things. I can relate.

I think these „don’t do business with evil“ peeps are trying to make do as well as they’re watching the vast ignorant majority embrace consumerism and are panicking how to save our planet and our minds. I know its futile but I don’t think the majority wants to feel smug.

I learned something that helped me out a great deal since 2020: don’t assume malice if you can assume incompetence. (And for us autistic people: if you can assume incompetence, be kind and don’t repeat the ableism you were met with).

Just trying to spread some kindness. I hope it helps. Thank you for working so hard for your kid.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I appreciate your answer! I would like to offer a counterpoint; at what point does a person become responsible for their own ignorance? And how often is ignorance, whether intentional or otherwise, the direct cause of malice, or malicious behavior?

In the slim chance a person here sees what they said, and does not know that Amazon is "evil," merely saying not to work with an evil corporation is not educational, and therefore serves no purpose.

Since there was no effort to education, we can assume within a reasonable amount of doubt that they are speaking to those who are already educated. And if that's the case, then all they offer to the conversation is, at it's heart, self-satisfaction. Anyone aware that Amazon is evil who chooses to continue to use their services has either come to the conclusion that they have no choice, or simply doesn't care.

They add nothing to the conversation, and in fact, might reduce engagement with the premise (use this affiliate link to reduce the harm of doing business with Amazon).

I agree with your statement, that we should treat all actions with reasonable doubt. Offer that before assuming malicious intent. Which is absolutely true! I don't believe the commenter intentionally thought, "I'm going to shut down this conversation while also virtue signalling." But the effect is the same for the purpose of conversation. It adds nothing of value and may even discourage discourse. It is equally as useless, to me, as pretending to champion a cause from a screen, patting themself on the back for their wise ways, and doing nothing. It provides the illusion of helping, while adding nothing. And that's a dangerous thing.

I would correct my statement in the presence of anything at all to "add" to the discourse. Explaining why using Amazon would be unwise if it can be avoided. They did not make that effort. I stand by my previous comment. But I want to thank you for taking the time to engage me, and I really hope you continue to try showing other people the value of giving people the benefit of the doubt! It's so important, and does so much kindness in society.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Well said, both of your comments.

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and the people who focus on policing where others shop (or what others eat), instead of fighting the system that enables and encourages these corporations to exist and operate in the horrific way they do, are literally doing nothing to tackle the problem itself and are 100% doing it for their own dopamine hit and feelings of superiority (E: this is of course encouraged in capitalist society by those it serves via their media to divert attention away from them).

I'm also autistic as well as housebound, so I literally have no choice but to buy everything online, and while I try my best, there's almost no avoiding amazon, since even small businesses now sell through them exclusively. It's so frustrating how rarely the classism and ableism in those kinds of comments is discussed.

Never mind that it isn't even their retail business that makes them the bulk of their money, but AWS, but point that out to the person telling people not to shop there, and that it means that they almost certainly provide amazon income passively every time they use the internet, and watch the most incredible mental gymnastics display you'll see in a while. 🤦‍♀️

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

@DessertStorms
The world is much interconnected, and unknowingly we use the services of many that we don't agree with. Doesn't mean we shouldn't use, we absolutely should because that is what progress and technological evolution are.

Using some certain technology or service doesn't mean we agree with their leadership or policies

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I don't think it's saying to stop using the Internet, just that if you're talking to someone preaching to avoid Amazon retail purchases to avoid giving them money with the goal of bringing down the company, pointing out the fact that only avoiding retail but still using websites that are hosted on AWS is hypocritical. It's hypocritical because they will then start making excuses about why they won't stop using those websites, which shows that they only care about "fighting" the evil of capitalism when it's convenient (or only mildly inconvenient) for them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Using some certain technology or service doesn't mean we agree with their leadership or policies

Absolutely.
Especially in a world they've manufactured specifically to leave us no choice, from food, and hygiene (and cosmetics, which like fashion are entirely manufactured for profit and perpetuated by the media.) to energy, and so on and so on.
Wherever we spend, it almost certainly ends up in the hands of one of a few hundred people, that have created an illusion of choice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Counterpoint: Perhaps "Don't buy from evil" is just a catchy way to share a sentiment and you're taking it too literally/to an unintended extreme to be riled up as hard as you are about it? I see no intent from those comments in line with "fuck you if you give Bezos money" as you imply.

For example: Sonic's "GOTTA GO FAST," but in reality, he IS capable of standing around. "Gotta go fast" doesn't mean his circulatory system shuts down if he doesn't, it's just a short catchy way to share an aspect of himself. In that vein, nobody's kicking your door down if you get the specialized thing you need from Amazon, just saying that it can be beneficial to shop in other ways when possible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

🤔 And no one thought to make a federated Amazon alternative yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

I thought about it a couple of years ago, and even started gathering information and talking to people from the field, as well as consulting lawyers. I ended giving up on the idea because of too much complications.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I tried to avoid Amazon for a product the other week, by buying direct from the person who was selling through Amazon.

They had their own store.

The prices were 50% more than they were charging on Amazon.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

And there's a reason for that:

"[Amazon makes] every merchant that sells through their platform sign a "most favored nation" guarantee that they will not charge less for their products anywhere else – which means that the price is the same everywhere.

And that's the heart of the California antitrust case against Amazon: Amazon's market dominance makes it impossible to survive without offering your products on Amazon; to succeed there, you must turn over 35-45% of your gross to Amazon. That leads to higher prices on Amazon, and, thanks to the most favored nation deal, it pushes those same higher prices to every other retailer."

So basically the price on their website is what the company would charge you if they would want to be a sustainable business (or they're trying to recoup their losses from selling on Amazon).

Source

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 years ago

Amazon Smile is discontinued fyi

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago

There’s so much irony in this comment it cured my anemia

[–] [email protected] 78 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Anything and everything that politicians propose to protect children, I am automatically against. It doesn't matter how good it sounds, if they say anything about protecting children, I'm opposed to it.

This is because they know that 'protect children' are magic words that let them get away with almost anything, and that's genuinely about the only time they say that anyway. Basically nothing the government does is actually to protect children.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 years ago

We had a recreational marijuana referendum in my state and the opposition signs said, "Save the Children." From what? I have no idea. Unsurprisingly, the vote failed.

Of course, it really helped that the state legislature sued to halt the referendum on grounds of improper procedure which caused the referendum to be put on the ballot as a special election instead of the mid-terms ballot. The judge dismissed the lawsuit, by the way.

The shit some people will do to stop other people from having a good time.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

God, that's totally depressing, and I totally agree with you.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

US keeps taking the flame while EU, Bastion of Rights™, just outright banning encryption.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Different departments. It's the 'keep the plebs in line department' that wants to scan your devices.
Where as the 'keep the rich giving us money department' are not actioning the rapist list

Wish I could add a /s to this.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They're the same department.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Why would they be? To save taxpayers' money?

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 years ago

Government:

Star Wars "Of course I know him, he is me."

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe if 30% of the population weren't trying to re-elect one of those people for president it would be easier.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's so adorable how many Americans think that the oligarchs they support are different.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

LMAO imagine being an apologist for pedophilia and human trafficking and then judging others.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Imagine using straw man arguments when you have no actual point to make.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

My point is very clear, if people want Epstein's list of associates and people who paid him to see justice, then they need to vote accordingly, and definitely NOT for the guy who was good friends with Epstein and visited his island many times.

[+] [email protected] -7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Everybody on the list should be prosecuted, why aren't the democrats doing that?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

First of all, if a hearing is held in congress and not by the DOJ, then you're absolutely expecting too much to think anything will be done for justice of past crimes. I don't think the Senate or House can do anything on this topic other than keep the government funded. Historically, Congress has never shown the capacity to prosecute outside of changing how laws are enforced, which is moot because everything Epstein did is already illegal.

Second, I assure you there are active investigations to many of the names in the list, but not much incriminating evidence was found for the more than a thousand people he had some form of contact with over the last couple of years due to their discreet methods of conducting business. A lot of relevant court documents only recently became unsealed since trials started in 2016. Many new contacts were revealed at the end of the Virgin Islands Civil Lawsuit as well. Ghislaine Maxwell got 20 years, Sarah Kellen could be next as Federal Judges have expressed interest in charging her as early as the conclusion of the Maxwell trials in January 2022, JP Morgan have spent 13.8 Million USD on legal fees in the case and will pay 290 Million in reparations for facilitating the financial side of Epstein's business, Deutsche Bank will pay 75 Million, etc. To claim that nothing has happened and nothing is being done is ignorance.

As much as some people would love to blame and execute Bill Clinton, for example, all he ever did was borrow the man's plan on a trip to various charity medical sites across Africa that Epstein was unrelated to. So then where do you draw the line? Epstein made it his business to go to parties and shake hands with the influential. He disguised himself as a wealthy venture capitalist for over 2 decades before being outed as a trafficker.

In fact, almost half of Maxwell's charges were dropped because there wasn't enough concrete evidence and some of the charges overlapped with a previous conviction where they were granted immunity in a plea deal for state level charges. That's how hard it is to get a conviction for a crime with only witness testimony. It's like pulling nails. But it can be done.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Or Maxwell's client list...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm out of the loop, what's this?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The gal that recruited and ran girls under Epstein's racket had a book of clients that turned up in evidence, and naturally the government isn't going after a single one of them because they're "special" aka rich and powerful

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Sad

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago

What the hell would stop the government from just putting CSAM onto the phones of political rivals and upstarts to get them jailed without question?

And child molesters will run away scot-free on account of all this.

Isn't there anyone who will stop the dirty child molesters without wanting power in return? Anyone?

Anyone who will stop the government?

Anybody?

[+] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You won't though

[+] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

[deleted]

Memes

Rules: