Conserve thier god given right to exploit everyone and everything for thier short term benefit.

So here is one of the pages I read… https://linux-gaming.kwindu.eu/index.php?title=Should_you_switch_to_Linux_gaming%3F I saw similar sentiment in other places as well. Sounds like you are saying this isn’t the majority opinion?

Overall, I have a strong dislike for apple in general, and I won’t take a job where I have to work with windows ever again unless I am desperate. And I am also getting very tired of Microsoft’s bs. But I don’t want my main home pc to be a project either. I already use Firefox and a vpn. But every time some page doesn’t work right I have to turn off the vpn, and try chrome before I know the problem is on thier end. And it usually isn’t, well other than not supporting firefox and a vpn, but these are banks or doctors offices, I don’t have a lot of choice in most of them. There is only so much of that I am willing to do on my main home pc. But overall, I would like to be part of the solution, as long as I am a target user, which from what I have read, I am not.

I was reading pages about going linux only. Everyone I read warned people off about how it isn’t easy and such. That was just one example. But for work linux is easier to support, hands down. I have supported both. But for my home pc… which surfs the web, plays games, and not much else… windows is sadly easier according to the pages I read.

Sure, and where the line is drawn now is why more people don’t use Linux. I even use it for work, but still don’t want to deal with the hassle at home. I am getting a new home pc soon, and I thought maybe linux is ready. So I started reading up. No, I do not want to have to reinstall the os several times before I get it right. I don’t want another chore.

Doh, I thought it was Liechtenstein. I rember three small things from my kids geography quizes… Monaco, Vatican city, and Liechtenstein. So in my mind it had to be one of them. Lol.

Selling personal data at all should just be banned. It says personal right in the name… Giving away free services with forced adds is exploitation in my opinion. The first step to solving the issue is to require everything have a paid option that gets rid of adds and doesn’t sell personal data for additional profit. The hard part with that is preventing them from just setting the price unreasonably high.

Or… do both. Buy premium because you are actually getting something for your money… a platform. And support ad blockers to stop the ads where the product is just a webpage.

Why worry about the downvoters. This isn’t reddit yet.

Honestly, is that different here? Dogpiling is the rage everywhere. It’s better than reddit, but you still have a hard time if you even question something that follows the dominant ideology here. And God forbid you actually read any of the articles people post and point out that commenter’s are just making shit up to fit that ideology.

Insurance is why. They can sell insulin at the prices they currently do, and still sell it to millions. Insurance companies can in turn charge more overall as well, pointing at the cost of insulin and the millions who need it as one of the reasons. So it is win win for both the buyer (Insurance) and the seller.

Yes, but they want money. So why deny us teeth when they can let us have teeth for money. They can make more selling it to millions of people then a few rich people.

Distinction without a difference to the point. The demand was always there. It was never induced.

But the demand was always there. They wanted to move, they just didn’t. So the lane didn’t induce it. The choice of that word was intentional. It was to argue against more lanes. It is really unserved demand that they just ignored originally.

Yeah, the interactions suck. But if dealt with earlier, they could have been mitigated. Same way mass transit does. Express trains. Have a highway over a highway that goes to a specific place. If you stack enough of those, people get on the one they need and go straight to where they need to get. Not realistic though unless planned in advance.

My last paragraph agrees with you.

See you are missing the point. The demand isn’t induced, it was always there. They wanted to move and use thier car, but traffic was too bad. My complaint is with the BS argument that the extra lane caused demand to materialize out of no where. It was always there, just unserved.

People aren’t hitting 60 in LA during rush hour…

People will talk about induced demand and all that. But those people really just want to be able to get around. The fact that they just don’t because the traffic is so bad doesn’t mean you shouldn’t add more lanes. It means you should add a lot more. Same with the one lane at a time approach. The fact that it didn’t work does mean you are doing something wrong, but it maybe that you need to add 5 lanes at a time, not one. Now I’m not saying they should actually do that, just that the arguments against are BS.
A comprehensive public transit system, well maintained and well patrolled is what LA really needs. I am talking Paris metro on steroids. And it is going to cost in the trillions. But it isn’t getting any cheaper by waiting.

That this occurred to someone is just more proof that groceries cost too much.

So what is the stack overflow replacement?