Who you vote for does not imply who you are in bed with. Unless you like sewing discourse

Thanks for voting! I didn't see it in your OP, and I dont keep track of what Lemmy users say across posts.

Im not a centerist. However there is a time and a place with everything in life. November 6th I'm ready to start promoting a new voting system and changing whats causing this mess.

Vote this election then. And then campaign after the election. What's stopping you from being the change later? Why teach the a lesson now, when the alternative is Drumpf?

I have not seen many leftists not agree that both votes are for genocide - that's just a given.

But protesting the system during the election is daft. Do you want genocide, or more genocide? You are not a slave to the system if you vote and then actually do something about it to change it.

Ignoring the current system is plain ignorance. Voting doesn't make you a slave. Voting and giving up makes you a slave. How about vote and campaign for change instead. Despair does not lead to change.

That's been my experience on Lemmy recently too. It feels like there is a push to disenfranchise to "teach them a lesson we dont support genocide by ensuring a somewhat more genocidal maniac gets in instead".

I get the sentiment, but it ignores the two party system, and not voting does not fix that broken system, it ensures it. And I think the trolls know this too.

Sure. I totally understand that, but the stakes are different during an election in a system which at this very moment cannot and will not change. It serves to disenfranchise people.

You can and should campaign about this issue. At the same time, the stakes at present are not about whether the US will exit Israel or not. No amount of disapproval will change that fact, so why not focus on the things that will change, and come back to this later?

And if you're in this position where you see this all as fact, then what is the alternative?

IMO there is none.

Trying to rebuild the system at the time of an election is the wrong time. You have two options - because that is the reality you live in (right now).

Work on building something better AFTER the election, change the system, fix it for the future. But for NOW, you get a choice. Not voting (in this system) is a vote for ambivalence, and you dont seem like the person that doesn't care.

But importantly, work to change the system later. You have valid concerns and the system you are in is broken, but you can make a change.

Edit: to not be misconstrued, I agree with the issues at hand that you're highlighting. I'm just saying that the alternative is worse and that is a likelihood in this reality no?

When will the pressure be applied? It sure as shit won't be the current election, so you're betting on it still being a thing in 4 years that they can change their mind on?

Calling your representatives changes more opinions than "not voting" or "voting for someone else" in a two party system.

She has been talking about a different way of doing things though, I got the feeling she talked about many policies in the debate that people have ignored.

Non American here, but it really feels like there is nothing she can do to shake the non-trump thing. Lemmy is full of "Trump bad", but I'm missing the "Kamala good". Its as though no one wants to say it, and it feels like it always comes back to Israel. That is understandable too, however she is not a one policy candidate, however it feels like that is how its reduced.

Honestly I get the feeling that its either:

1. People being very opposed to one policy enough that its blinding them
2. Literal trolls trying to make enough noise to make it a trump vs. Non-trump to disenfranchise the voters

I want to see the "Kamala stands good on policy X" posts here. They should exist but where are they?

No I dont condone the Israel shit, but there has to be more to it. That's too simple.

I know of some people that never use 403, but instead opt for 404 for security reasons. 403 implies that there is something they could have access to, but don't.

I think in some situations that this can be valid, but it shouldn't be a crux.

My cat. Sure its not recent. But my cat 😃

ROI from adverts is always a shitshow though. If you come off a plane and see <brand name product> and buy it, is it because you just saw an advert for it, or were you always going to buy it. There is of course stats that may show number of impressions vs. total purchases trend, but its still just massive correlation that I imagine there is a bunch of people pulling spreadsheets together to justify their marketing spend. Anecdotally, I've heard of data teams working with marketing teams and just going "whelp, whatever you need to justify your job", etc.

Real ROI via direct sales though, that's somewhat measurable since you have a direct cost of acquisition (sales person salary, overheads, etc) vs revenue.

I always wondered this too.

Found a website saying Youtube adviews are $100-300 per 10k (ad views, not video views). That's 1-3¢ per view. If we assume an ad is 10seconds, then your time is worth 0.1-0.3¢ per second, or $3.60-10.80 per hour.

An A380 looks to be 380-615 seats. I'd imagine they're more often optimising for space, so let's say 550.

Long haul flight, 10% of people at any time using inflight stuff, 8 hours, 4 ads per hour = 5500.18*4 ads watched. 1760 ads. There will be a massive premium for planes, but surely only one order of magnitude more (e.g. 10x). That's equivalent to give or take 20k YouTube adviews which would be $200-600 per flight.

There are a lot of planes in the sky every single day though....

I thoroughly agree. Which is why we need governments and regulation IMO. Consumers are working in a vacuum of knowledge, businesses are not incentivised to give said knowledge.

Just because something is expensive doesn't always mean that the standard of living of those making the product is any better. Nike sweat shops for example.

Consumers dont have a lot of transparent choices here. Governments have roles in regulating and making the true cost of products more transparent. I'd say businesses have that responsibility, but clearly that doesn't work, otherwise we wouldn't be here etc. Businesses dont want people feeling guilty when they buy their product, so why would they tell people.

For a business to be competitive in a harm free supply chain, then the playing field needs to be levelled. Transparent supply chains everywhere, make everyone feel guilty all the time, maybe something would change.

Also, "line goes up" is a dick measuring contest between CEOs of different companies.

relying solely on cash injections.

That's just the case. Not everyone buys lifetime subscriptions. This is a short term cash injection for investment. I don't know their books, but I doubt the majority of their long term income will come from these lifetime subs.

There are some ski lifts that give lifetime passes. Its used as a cash injection to fund investments rather than lending off an institution that will want their money back.

Sure you'll want your lifetime video data for free, but I bet there are a bunch of lifetime members that don't watch much over a lifetime and/or the risk of future video watching outweighs the loan interest they'd have to pay otherwise.

Killing them I don't think will help. I wouldn't forgive them. But I hope society is able to rehabilitate that person, because killing others isn't something I believe is an accepted normal thing to do, and that person has problems that need resolving.

I guess politics is modern societies version of how to make rules in society? E.g. it's all politics, no?