Not nearly as absurd as resisting it by firing into crowds of innocent people and voting for someone who openly struggles to put basic sentences together.
If you want to play the "this person represents everyone I disagree with" game, you're going to have to do better than one person, who may not even exist, being a dildo.
Still better than being far-right dogshit.
It's not even close.
It doesn't need to be profitable, let alone have every fraction of a cent squeezed from it.
Stupid it is then.
This has to be the shittest attempt to stay "mask on" in the history of this community right?
I don't think anyone capable of typing could also be so deeply, obliviously stupid that they thought people would read the post, then read...
Nah, im a very nice person in real life, vut the anger has to go somewhere...
... and take it mean anything other than "people in my life also don't know I'm racist dogshit but rather than grow as people, we should keep being racist dogshit on the internet"
It's just something a racist made up to push "black people are stupid so we should be able to keep them as slaves and genocide them".
You don't need to dig any deeper for answers. The hole has already been dug and what a surprise, there a racist cesspit at the bottom.
Honestly don't mean this as an insult, but you might want to consider being more concise, so that your point comes across better.
I'm cool with ranting. I enjoy the act of writing, blogs are long dead and it's important to articulate why so many things in the world are fucking shit.
If we all work together, it's been proven that it does turn things around
When?
The ones making Society horrible definitely win when no one pushes back.
They also win when people do push back, because thats how the game has been rigged. The extent of the public's power is making them win slightly less.
The only way to stop companies doing unethical things is strict regulations, ruthlessly enforced. The only times "consumer advocacy" ever works is when the government steps in, which is why the ultra wealthy go to so much effort to ensure they never do.
One good person in politics, with power, is worth a million people boycotting.
Partly, this is because "the free market will solve it" is just a neoliberal lie. Sometimes, there's simply no other choice as corporations race each other to the bottom.
So this streaming service might have gotten shitty, espensive or unethical, but you can move to another right? Oh no, looks like they're shitty and unethical too, just slightly differently.
Then in six months time, they've each absorbed one another's shitty, greedy practises anyway, ensuring consumers are fully exploited with nowhere else to go.
But the true power of neoliberalism lies in its giant book of premade excuses, so neoliberals (or neoliberals in disguise) will of course read from the next page:
"Oh that's just because there isn't enough competition. We just need to deregulate heavily and allow companies to do whatever the streaming equivalent of dumping toxic by-products in the river is!"
But of course, that won't ever come true either. The companies that already exist will grow more profitable polluting the river and new entries into the market will be either stamped out, bought and stripped for parts or enshittified by the same greed over time.
Following the flowchart taught at exclusive, expensive schools the world over, the next excuse is to blame the consumers.
"Oh if people really cared, they'd simply stop buying things entirely. But they don't, because these companies continue to bring in record profits. So secretly, consumers actually love their chocolate being picked by child slaves".
While they do fight back with boycotts, public outcry and (in this case) things like password sharing and piracy, it's nothing companies can't crush if it looks like it might actually dent their profits.
At some point, consumers need to pick their misery and the choices are bleak but obvious.
They can accept the minor misery of advertising, even as they pay a subscription, just like the corporation knew they would.
They can escalate their own misery further by boycotting the entire platform or industry.
But the moral high ground doesn't make spending your few hours of personal time each day staring at the wall suddenly as entertaining as whatever content you're no longer watching.
Also, the company doesn't care. That was part of their calculations and they're still making even more money.
Or finally, they could maximise their misery and actually do something, like busting out the guillotines or becoming a politician that opposes neoliberalism yet is somehow allowed power.
So anyway, people are tired. The fight never ends and some people have fought it for 50 years already. Encourage them to take the third option by all means, but don't shame them for taking the first option.
They might already be miserable enough.
Nope. I know it's hard for you to relate to, but I'm not remotely insecure enough to be "triggered" by a stranger who smells like a Magic: The Gathering tournament, hurling someone else's insults like a parrot taught to swear, because there's nothing else for him to do now that they teach teenagers to recognise emotional abuse.