From: Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Full headers:
From: "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: Adobe Stock Images pays photo $0.18 for using his photo
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 10:01:41 -0500
Organization: NNTP Server
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <p1du31$1b0n$>
References: <> <p0rg46$1tqe$> <131220171132354803%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <181220171608156123%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <p19er6$101g$> <> <> <p19qv4$1f8c$> <181220172047100279%nospam@nospam.invalid> <p19rs6$1gce$> <181220172123331269%nospam@nospam.invalid> <p1b4qj$17kh$> <191220171145292036%nospam@nospam.invalid> <> <>
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
Print Article
Forward Article
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}> wrote

| In the case of Mayayana, and his anti-Apple bias, his usage of Appleseed 
| undoubtably, and intentionally derogatory. He has a similar anti-Adobe 

  No, actually, that's your bias. I just like
to call a spade a spade. Or whatever a spade would
like to be called, of course. If it wants to be called
an upside-down heart I'll humor them. But if a spade
wants to be called a club, well that's just a lie.

  These big companies spend billions to sell their
commercial propaganda and even to establish laws
in their own favor. I just try to balance the story.

  You repeatedly get ruffled by my criticism, but you
fail to notice that I say similar things about Microsoft,
Google, Amazon and Facebook. It's only your favorite
companies that you can't stand having criticized. Is
that reasonable, adult thinking, to refuse to see the
negative parts of the companies you buy from... and
to take it personally when they're criticized, just because
you own the product? I'd call such a person either a
child or a sucker.

  Fortunately, public opinion and mainstream media
are finally beginning to grasp that Big Tech is not just
some sort of whiz-bang Santa Claus bringing us more
fun toys, but are actually among the sleaziest of
companies, and have, to some extent, pulled a coup
to take over the public space and public dialogue:

  The interesting thing with tech is that there's a lot
of naivety. The Google twins, Steve Jobs and his acolyte
Tim Cook, Zuck and his sidekick Sheryl... They all seem to
truly believe that they're helping society. Yet their
companies are not non-profits. (Cook threw a tantrum at
the very idea that Apple should have to pay their fair
share of corporate taxes... He's fighting with the EU even
now over his Irish cash-stashing scam, while he has his
overpriced gadgets assembled by virtual slave labor in Asia.
But the TV ads are all about a bambi-cute company
who loves you. Why should we avoid seeing those things?)

   All three companies have gone to great lengths to make
as much money as they possibly can. All three have gone
beyond basic decency to maximize the profits further.
The unique part is that they don't seem to see themselves
as hungry business competitors. They seem to honestly
believe that they're do-gooders. Then again, a do-gooder
can be the most dangerous person. They can't bear to
admit their own aggression to themselves, so in their
mind, when they wrong you it's always for your own

   And yes, Microsoft have done a lot of nasty things.
Do I have to always add that qualifier when I point
out Apple's flaws? Can you also admit that Apple, and
not only Microsoft, are often sleazy?