Stay tuned for more useless language facts!
Good luck! Remember to hashtag your posts generously at first, because there’s no algorithm!
I’d say Pixelfed is great for photography; unlike Instagram its userbase is actually photography-focused, but unfortunately you cannot count on people to include all details in their posts.
…and join pixelfed!
I find !technology@beehaw.org quite a bit better.
I recommend not using streaming services as almost all money goes to the streaming company and the labels, and instead buying music directly from the artists.
Same as with most artists, go to their website and you’ll find the bandcamp/faircamp/etc page, in this case:
There are plenty of better ways to obtain music, such as actually buying the music instead of streaming it. And, hey, that’s like saying you’d stay on Reddit because that’s where the content is. Ethics should come before easy entertainment.
The best way is always to buy the music directly from the artist, in this case:
https://vid.puffyan.us/watch?v=fNjQG7y9aoQ
I love Weird Al! But pretty sure this was hyperbole. The point still stands, though. It really is depressing that people just follow “everybody else” when giving abusive megacorporations money. Same with social media, especially when there are great, healthy, ethical alternatives to be found is the Fediverse.
Edit: I’ll just link pixelfed just because…
Yes, but you also won’t give them your payment information every time you use the internet, or on every device, so often it might just as well be someone else on your IP address.
No, but the more they know about you, the surer they can be that different groups of data belong to the same person. Since music taste is quite personal, it helps quite a lot in constructing a profile. And I sure hope you do understand that it isn’t ideal that tech giants know everything about you.
The problem is when that streaming service also tells all its company friends what music you streamed, which helps them profile you even more accurately.
Yes, but in the end, there is no real motivation to respond accurately to surveys either. It’s just that it’s our reflex based on our previous social interactions that it feels wrong to respond inaccurately. Similarly, it will feel wrong when responding in a socially unfavourable way to a question about well-being, even if it’s a survey.
Additionally, longer-term happiness is a quite vague experience so there isn’t much keeping one from interpreting it however you like.
Of course, I’m not saying that there is no truth to the report. I’m just saying it’s not particularly newsworthy because the numbers aren’t particularly concrete and it doesn’t describe any single important event at all.
I meant subjective as in what you say. All that humans do is to strive to fulfill their own motivations, and communication is just doing so through interaction with other humans. The only reason for that what we say is connected to what we actually experience is that we don’t like people finding out we are misleading them and as a result like us less.
Nobody else can really measure our happiness, though, so there is no concrete motivation to respond to such questions as accurately as possible, so we’re much more inclined to just say what is socially the most favourable.
Like, do you genuinely reply how you are feeling when someone asks you how you’re doing? I’d say most people don’t.
I do agree, but I don’t think China performing well qualifies as World News, because subjective well-being is only loosely connected to actual experiences.
…closely followed by Saudi Arabia. Yeah, I’m not a big fan of these happiness reports.
deleted by creator
It’s a Lemmy client:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=io.syncapps.lemmy_sync
Ah, so you’re a troll.
Edit: looking at your profile, I’m not so sure anymore. If you’re not, please do explain how that makes the US any less of a rogue state.
I only subscribe to smaller communities and browse big communities from ‘all’ (although I rarely do). That way big communities don’t drown out what I actually want to see.