• 6 Posts
  • 468 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 3rd, 2023

help-circle


  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@sopuli.xyzRip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    As I said in a other comment, I think “they didn’t live long enough” is a bit of misconception. I’ll repeat my comment here rather than writing it out again:

    "So I’m no expert, so take this with a grain of salt, but it’s my understanding that while average ages were much lower in the past, this number is heavily skewed by infant mortalities and deaths due to preventable disease. As I understand it, the expected age of an otherwise healthy individual was pretty comparable to us today. More people died young, but those who didn’t lived about as long as us. So I don’t think not living long enough for skin cancer to take effect really jives with my understanding of history.

    But again, I’m not an expert and the likelihood that I’m just an idiot who is wildly misunderstanding things is, frankly, high."



  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@sopuli.xyzRip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I’ll say that I think if the situation was truly as simple and non-nuanced as you describe, I wouldn’t have any reason to be confused or uncertain on the topic.

    But as stated, since even those who adhere to best practices seem to be at higher risk with compound exposure, I think your claim of simple acclimation is a little lacking. I think there is truth in what you say, but far from the whole truth and it is what is missing which eludes me as well.


  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@sopuli.xyzRip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    So I’m no expert, so take this with a grain of salt, but it’s my understanding that while average ages were much lower in the past, this number is heavily skewed by infant mortalities and deaths due to preventable disease. As I understand it, the expected age of an otherwise healthy individual was pretty comparable to us today. More people died young, but those who didn’t lived about as long as us. So I don’t think not living long enough for skin cancer to take effect really jives with my understanding of history.

    But again, I’m not an expert and the likelihood that I’m just an idiot who is wildly misunderstanding things is, frankly, high.


  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@sopuli.xyzRip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    I mean I definitely see your point, but as I understand it even field workers are encouraged to use sunscreen and farmers and others who spend a lot of time outdoors are at greater risk of long-term damage, not lesser, despite this supposed acclimation.


  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@sopuli.xyzRip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    Those make sense to me, but I’ll be honest with you, where I struggle is with the idea of sunscreen. How did our ancestors live outside constantly without any sunscreen but if I’m outside for more than 2 hours in the summer without it I come home looking like a burnt lobster?

    I’m sure the answer is that I’m ignorant, or the “natural causes” of yesteryear were really just undiagnosed skin cancer or something, but I have to admit it does seem like a real negative adaptation here from the viewpoint of my uneducated mind.



  • You have already been paying Google for that 6+ hours before even a penny came out of your account - you’re just been paying in data. We have to stop pretending Google is some good guy that left an open platform in the world and just said “if you use it we’ll show you some ads.”

    Ads aren’t even the main revenue stream for Youtube, data is. All of these points about “paying for a service” become moot the moment we acknowledge the value of the data Google is farming from our interactions. This is how we’re paying for Youtube. If you choose to buy Youtube Premium, understand that you’re paying to not have ad interruption. You aren’t paying for Youtube, because that was already happening, you’re just paying for the convenience of avoid ads.


  • Don’t be disingenuous. We are already paying for that service, in our data and attention.

    It would be an entirely different story if paying for Youtube Premium immediately opted you out of participating in Google’s data-mining and data-selling, and if paying for Youtube Premium removed not just the overt ads but the algorithmically-manipulated advertising content as well (what is the effective difference between a Pepsi ad and a Good Mythical Morning video titled “trying every new Pepsi flavor”?), but it since it DOESN’T do those then we aren’t talking about paying for a service - we are talking about a company asking for every penny in our wallet for a service which we are already paying for.






  • I understand what you’re saying and I want to sympathize, but I feel like we’re so far outside the norm here that some of this falls a bit flat to me. Like we aren’t talking about being swayed by a wolf in sheep’s clothing here, Trump is a an entire pack of wolves loudly shouting “the wolves have arrived, fuck all you sheep!”

    I think there was a point what you say rang true, but I can’t help but feel like we’re so off-course at this point that if you haven’t seen Trump for what he is yet it must be because you are WILLFULLY evading that reality.
    I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone touting the “both sides are the same narrative” still, today, about Trump, can possibly truly believe that. I genuinely think you are only hearing from the mouths of charlatans, foreign agents, intentional accelerationists, and the absolute most genuinely ignorant of people. Maybe I’m jaded, but the alternative is legitimately incomprehensible to me at this point.


  • Vespair@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mlMe but ublock origin
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    28 days ago

    Even when you aren’t seeing ads their algorithm is still controlling your front page, allowing them to push partner content that isn’t directly advertising but still acts like it. The differences between a commercial for Doritos and an episode of Good Mythical Morning titled “Trying Every Doritos Flavor” from the perspective of the PepsiCo marketing department are that people might willingly click on the GMM video and they probably didn’t even have to pay anyone for the video to happen.
    Sure Rhett & Link may not have a partnership with Pepsi and are just innocently making content to give their audience (I genuinely believe this), so they’ve got no part in this becoming advertising, but you would have to be incredibly naïve to believe that Google’s algorithm isn’t smart enough to recognize that video and others like it as marketable content the promotion of which can be sold to PepsiCo.

    Premium subscribers may not be seeing ads, but they are absolutely still seeing advertising.

    edit: typos