BranBucket

Look, if that plant hadn't approved of what those three were doing, it would have left the room long ago. By staying until the room was in fire, the plant showed it's true colors. That is a fascist plant, and I'm not saving it.

It's a scenario where Tucker's main schtick makes sense in context. Ruby Rhod is basically Space Tucker with a gossip podcast, and his hyper-annoying behavior serves to illustrate how different he, the other passengers, and celebrity obsessed people in that universe are from Corbin's grounded and sane everyman character.

The kind of person who does this to their car won't believe it's true, while simultaneously defending it as him doing nothing wrong because all the liberals say it's okay to do it, which also doesn't mean admitting Trump actually did it, because he didn't, and this is also proof that Dems did much worse things, even though it's not real and just a plot to destroy Trump and let Satan rule over the world.

TDS is a Swiss army tool for controlling what their base thinks and dealing with negative press. I don't know if it evolved organically or was created, but promoting the idea that anyone who says anything negative about Trump is hysterical, jealous, and irrationally hell-bent on destroying him has been insanely effective for them.

It's less about you and more about enabling nutcases like this guy to be complete and utter tools for what they think is a greater cause. You can already see it in use with the Epstein files along with their other grand slam propaganda tools.

Yeah, if Elon destroys his life gooning to a creepy chstbot and leaves his companies in the hands of people with actual intelligence and souls we'd all be better off.

Why can't we win the AI race and still not have a surveillance state? Those don't seem like they have to be linked...

You can still get onions at my Costco, you just have to ask at the counter. Never seen the polish though, and now I feel nostalgic for something I've never had...

We have the $120 annual membership.

What we save on dog food in the first four months of the year pays for that membership. And the store brand dog food is manufactured for Costco by Diamond, so it's better quality than anything available at Walmart for less.

Household goods, TP, laundry detergent, dishwasher detergent, etc, etc are a significant savings if you have space to store them.

Some of the deals on groceries, meat, frozen goods and so forth are significant if you have a deep freeze or extra fridge in the garage to keep everything in.

It's more than a grocery store though. Appliances, furnishings, electronics, gas, tires, and more can be had at decent prices. For instance, I can get a name brand car battery from Costco at the same cost as Auto Zone's no name special.

As others have said, the annual cash back reward is at least $120.

But...

You have to set a budget, have extra space, and be disciplined about shopping there. Stay out of the central impulse zone in the store unless there's something you need there, and comparison shop on major purchases. It's great for people stuck in the suburbs. For everyone else, YMMV.

As far as the hot dog goes... It's just a meme, man. Relax.

Yeah, journalistic integrity is important, and they shouldn't slander Google, due diligence and what not.

But there wouldn't even be a need for an article or any investigation if Google and other tech companies weren't treating user data as something they have a god given right to.

That's my point. It doesn't matter what Google does or doesn't do with the data. They shouldn't collect it unless I tell them they can. It's MY data. It's MY right to keep it private or destroy it as I please. That's the baseline all tech companies should adhere to.

Play Services does collect data it shouldn't collect, by sending it back to Google.

Right. And my argument is that this shouldn't happen without users opting in.

But the difference between "I am collecting your data" and "I wrote software you are running" is important and needs defending,

I don't disagree. Not am I arguing the content of the article. I just disagree with your notion that we have to prove negligence or malfeasance to deserve privacy.

Your original post placed the burden on users to prove that Google mismanages the data they collect. That's not how this should work. I should own that data, just as I own the text I write with a text editor. I shouldn't have to prove that Google is mismanaging it in order to keep that data private. I shouldn't need any other reason than "it's my data and I don't want to share it beyond what is necessary for this technology to operate."

If you don't collect the data in the first place, there's nothing to mismanage.

Rather than users having to prove that Google is mismanaging OUR data, Google should prove it has a need to collect, aggregate, and sell access to that data beyond surveillance capitalism.

The default option should be that only fully anonymized data that is essential to device functions should be collected, and this should be validated through an independent audit. Everything else should be opt-in.

Imagine if angels performed a miracle that allowed a tater tot and a McDonald's hashbrown to produce a child, after which someone found the least expensive way to replicate that product by mundane and industrial means.

Hearty, weighty, and substantial, yet still crispy on the outside while soft on the inside.

I like to use the sauce packets to draw little designs on them, elevating an already divine side dish into the perfect amuse-bouche.