circuscritic

Really?

So you disagree with my broad strokes explainer on undocumented population distribution?

Or do you disagree with my assertion that most perpetrators of crime victimize people in their same community?

You're assuming that undocumented persons are evenly dispersed amongst the country, and in every community, when they're not.

While you'll find undocumented persons all over the country, like any other group, there are areas of heavy concentration that account for the majority of population. And in those areas, they tend to form communities around each other.

So if the vast majority of them live within communities that comprise heavily of other undocumented migrants, those crimes that are between two and undocumented persons, are significantly less likely to be brought attention of American law enforcement.

I'm not saying never, but that is a common enough occurrence to skew those stats and make them disingenuous at best.

Again, nothing new to what I'm saying here...

Of course.... Why wouldn't I?

Wait...Do you believe spreading bad information, or fake news, is justified if it's for something you believe in?

And it's not skepticism, it's a known flaw in that bogus stat. It's not like I'm breaking news here.

The crime stats are heavily skewed as undocumented persons are significantly less likely to involve the police.

Large groups of people are pretty predictable. The actual crime rates are probably much closer to the equivalent crime rates of the cities and neighborhoods that align to with their own economic status i.e class and poverty are the best predictors of crime rates, not citizenship, or lack thereof.

This isn't an argument for, or against, any immigration policy. It's an argument against using flawed statistics.

I don't see the issue here.

I detest what Spotify has been, and is doing, to artists, but this isn't that.

Spotify jump started a market by infusing it with cash, and then ran out of cash. It sounds similar to when a patron of the arts no longer has the funds available for patronage.

Yes, it sucks for those people who lost their funding, but podcasts are profitable all over without the infusion of cash from Spotify.

I realize that those with a large overhead, or those who are otherwise just unable to adapt, are in a shit situation, but I suspect the rest of them, and those that follow, will adopt the monetization strategies of other successful podcast markets.

Also, who the fuck wants to use the Spotify app for podcasts? Jesus I would never subject myself to that, they'll be better off for it in no time.

If that was true, I wouldn't have climaxed.

Really this just sounds like YT membership, allowing users to create subscriptions for premium/special content e.g. gambling picks, porn, etc.

If that's all it was intended to be, it could have been an actually useful and not intrusive monetization strategy....5 years ago.

Even if that's how the feature gets rolled out now, unless it's an unmitigated disaster, I don't see them being capable of not overplaying their hand.

They will assume that because some users are willing to pay for private porn content, or gambling pick subreddits, that of course most users must also be willing to pay for cat photos and memes.

Personally, I am all for it. I am for Reddit making the worst choices possible and speed running their decline. Mostly, I would like a user exodus that results in Lemmy finally getting growth in a lot of their more niche communities that still keep me using Reddit on occasion.

I realize the article was written to make it sound like they lost money on this, but I would be shocked if they had.

To vastly oversimplify it, private equity does a few things to make money on the companies they acquire:

• Significantly reduce staff, and increasing workload
• Strip and sell off individual assets
• Load the company with debt

The last parts are where it goes from amoral to "HOW THE FUCK IS THAT LEGAL?"

The private equity firm will have its own separate entities that provide a variety of services, for example janitorial or administrative.

The new private equity owners will then replace all the current vendors, with their own entities at a expentionally hirer costs. All the while, paying themselves gigantic consulting fees.

Basically those are all just ways to legally embezzle money by extracting all the resources from the company. Once that's done, they'll sell the last thing of value: the brand name itself e.g. CNET, VICE, etc.

If there is no money in the brand itself, then they'll just dissolve the company.

It's important to note the reason all this kicked off is a Russian boxing organization

That is what I was responding to. Your flippant dismissal of what the IBA actually is: a highly relevant intentional sporting organization for boxing, which is still true despite their current situation.

Shit on them for everything you laid out, their farsical antics this week, blatant corruption, or any other number of issues, but don't intentionally mislead and mischaracterize them to an audience that most likely largely ignorant of amateur boxing or combat sports in general. Or at least, that is assuming as there are no active combat sports communities on Lemmy that I have seen, be it MMA, boxing, kick boxing, etc.

It's not a Russian organization, it's the IBA - which is the premier amateur boxing organization/confederation, which is currently headed by a Russian national.

And his time in office has been a smashing success, such as when the IOC withdrew their recognition of the IBA, which removed the IBA from any involvement/participation in Olympic Boxing.

What I'm about to say is coming directly from my own asshole, so if someone actually knows what they're talking about cares to explain why I'm wrong, I'm open to hearing it.

This feels like an attempt to try extract as much capital as possible before other civil lawsuits and/or regulatory actions are able to do to the same.

Piped apps have been broken at least 6 - 8 times in the past couple of weeks.

It's the biggest Google effort I've seen to crack down on 3rd party YT clients.

I actually used to pay for YT premium, then they removed my discount AND raised the price to over $12/mo.

Sometimes I do miss my algorithm feed, just not enough to watch YT ads, or pay $12 - 15/mo.