Haha I imagine they need at least unique ip addresses to count. Now I wonder if for clicks to count you need to properly click through and load the target website with the same “browser fingerprint”.

Interesting, was wondering about this. This would also “help” the websites with more ad income right?

Any spices or sauces?

So if some actor complains about something deplorable, and then there is a huge manufactured fake backlash, is it always ok to write “The actor created controversy by…”?

Lets make your argument more absurd and say there is a hypothetical problem with boots stomping on faces. All day and night these people would randomly pick certain people and start to stomp on their faces. Hypothetically it’s recently been legalized by Trump via executive order.

Is complaining about that creating controversy? Is there any line of deplorable, morally unacceptable behavior that would shift the framing from “creating controversy by complaining” to “spoke out and became a victim of a manufactured outrage by fascists”?

My problem is with the framing and how we’re accepting fascism as legitimate, while hiding the backlash is fake, immoral and baseless. This is the opposite of accepting reality and fighting back. It’s accepting fascism as something that we must respect and tolerate.

The USA was a rogue terrorist state already for decades in it’s meaning for foreign policy and illegal wars. They did a worse thing than Russia did with Ukraine when they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan with flimsy excuses, except it was not a country on their doorstep but on the other side of the world.

Nobody is “aware” of this. People continue talking about US doing this or helping that as if they were not a rogue state.

So far Trump hasn’t done anything irreversible “rogue state” in regards to international relations. He constantly sprays shit everywhere to get people to loose their minds. Yeah he’s threatening to invade any nation where they could plunder, but he’s only saying the quite part out loud. The US has been doing that for decades.

I also don’t believe (hope) that Trump actually will start a war. It’s not his stage. It’s a long complicated affair where he isn’t in the spotlight and doesn’t get to shine and control the narrative with chaos and then hop onto the next thing the next week. He might bomb this or that as long as it’s quick to do, but he only wants to appear as the big man. Obviously this is just speculation.

If you mean “failed state” or no longer a democracy, I don’t think people think that already. They assume they can vote again for another obama / biden type in 4 years.

However will lemmy deal with dissenting or socialist comments? Oh bless my pure centrist heart!

That is not how “controversy” is used in the article though. The way the article phrases it “Zegler also stoked controversy…” frames it as a valid point of her doing something controversial - or problematic.

I’d bet you could find actual historic precedence for this. Imagine a german actress making her voice heard in the weimarer republic about the rising power of the NAZI party. Back then, people didn’t know where hate speech would lead. But now we know.

Hate speech must be opposed (see Paradox of Tolerance). If you accept it you help the fascists. There is no valid opinion except opposing it, so it is not controversial. There was no discussion that can be called a discussion. It’s just an attack by fascists.

At least on those two points. It is absolutely VITAL that we call out news media that are supposedly neutral like the BBC. If they accept fascist talking point as a valid opinion in discussion, we have already lost.

This is what I was referring to:

Zegler also stoked controversy with her views after the 2024 US presidential election. Writing on Instagram, she said she hoped “Trump voters and Trump himself never know peace”.

BBC simply shouldn’t take the critique coming from fascists seriously, it legitimizes it as two valid viewpoints.

The article mentions the “shade” but it seems she only commented on the elements of stalking and I guess you can also throw in the somewhat necrophiliac element of the prince kissing her presumably dead corpse lol.

But Snow White is based on a Grimm’s fairy tale anyway, which are quite bloody and cruel and far from the sweet Disney movies, and they also contain centuries of storytelling condensing a cultural subconsciousness and dreams. Disney was always more shallow entertainment going with the times. Enchanted is completely bonkers too but really amazing movie. So it’s all bullshit asking a remake to “stay true”.

PS: Holy shit 1.6/10 on IMDB, the trolls are really mobilizing. It’s like a weird “undead internet” where a large enough mass of people have been taken over by a hivemind to make things like democratic ratings irrelevant.

Seriously? With everything going on this is what people want to rage about? How disconnected do you have to be?

I mean casting her is obvious bait by the producers. But the BBC calling her comments “controversial”? That’s problematic at least. She opposed genocide and illegal occupation and opposed an authoritarian strongman gaining power. That is not a controversial comment in a liberal democracy and the founding values of the western democracy. That BBC article is garbage.

This was shit graphics even back in 1996 because it only uses primary or fully saturated colors. It’s “dev art”, made by someone with no artistic talent. Or maybe made for 4 year old kids. I missed out on a lot of games with good gameplay because I just can’t stand on this abomination of a color palette.

The worst thing? When games actually went with a more pastel or naturalistic color palette, moronic games journalists would say the colors look “drab” or some shit.

You’re basically arguing that a system shouldn’t support user friendly things because that would add significant burden to the programmer.

The quintessential linux philosophy. Well done! I mean, what is language? Why have named code variables? This is just a random array of bytes!