Exactly how is it fear mongering to point out that Google has been taking steps towards preventing the GrapheneOS devs from accessing the Android source code?

If anyone is planning on purchasing the new Motorola phone with the intention of using it with GrapheneOS they should be aware of what Google is trying to do and the risks associated.

Does it matter since Google seems intent on killing them?

I still haven’t forgiven Sony for shipping malware in their CDs, Lenovo will never get approval from me.

Lol, talk about falling for propaganda.

You’re not wrong. Edge is just Chromium with MS branding. It’s not a bad browser like IE was.

Although if they do shit like this it will be.

We’re not talking about Facebook. We’re talking about buying things.

Parental controls are a thing that exist. Used to be parents were responsible for monitoring what their children do, not the government or private corporations

Bro, I’m not denigrating anyone for spending money on Amazon. I’m guilty of forgetting the moral and ethical implications for a short term dopamine rush too.

But I’m not going to delude myself into thinking I had to spend money with them.

My problem is with people using flimsy excuses trying to assuage their guilt for doing something they knew was wrong.

Their comment was supplementary, not argumentative.

What, taking responsibility for your choices?

Enjoy!

It also seems like the person buying the gift might get to see the address, which is the problematic part.

That statement might just be a CYA in case a 3rd party seller accidentally gives out the address.

Well, yeah. If it’s a third party seller that means Amazon isn’t shipping you the product so they have to know your address.

Charging a car with fusion power is actually feasible. But it’ll take more energy to keep fusion going than it creates.

Yeah, lithium ion is a good stopgap while we develop better options, but it’s by no means stable. Get them too hot or puncture a cell and you’re going to have a bad time.

So you think people aren’t responsible for where they choose to spend their money? Is Amazon holding a gun to their head?

I do. It’s just the claim that people aren’t personally responsible for where they choose to spend their money is preposterous.

You shouldn’t shop there because of their blatantly anti-consumer monopolistic practices.

Companies like Amazon can’t exist if people don’t buy from them. The fact that you think people have to buy from them is the problem.

No one has to spend their money with Amazon. There’s always going to be a personal responsibility aspect when people willingly do something they know is wrong.

I guess a better term would be 'pop luxury ’