I’m not qualified enough to argue, but I wouldn’t trust Durov. He’s a competitor, after all. And he has a history of questionable decisions.

You forgot to describe what’s your problem.

Google, Meta and Microsoft are bad. But I’m good. I want to dictate who can use open-source software and how!

I’m glad that wizards keep pushing boundaries of magic.

Imagine you have lots of toys, like your favorite games and cool apps on your tablet or phone. If you had to update them manually, it’s like having to go to each toy, take it apart, fix anything that’s broken, and then put it back together every time there’s a new version or improvement.

Now, think about having a special toy store for your toys. When you go to the store, they already know about any new cool features or fixes for your toys. All you have to do is ask the store to update your toys, and they make sure all your toys get the latest and greatest stuff without you having to do anything.

So, having a store for apps is like having a magical place where all your toys can be fixed and improved automatically, without you having to do the hard work of updating each one by yourself. It saves you time and makes sure your toys are always the best they can be!

How? It’s not on F-Droid. Play store is obviously not an option for a person, who cares about privacy.

I don’t blame Beijing honestly. Bigots will just run around screaming “China Flu”, claim its from a lab or whatever.

And? How does this justify potential consequences? If they don’t cooperate, people won’t blame them? This logic is faulty from any side.

Do you have valid arguments against this proposal or is it just an emotional reaction caused by a single word?

I don’t have a Google account, so that’s not possible. I don’t use YouTube directly to watch it either.

Though I rarely commented when I had an account. There’s nothing of value. Content creators I’m following have other means to reach them.

I remember being addicted to that, I was addicted to the phone notifications. But I flashed a custom OS and stopped to give attention to my phone by not installing those games or social media apps, I have absolutely the minimum apps I can.

Good for you! But it’s important to recognize that each of us enters this world with different genes and is shaped by diverse environmental factors. These elements influence the chemistry within our bodies. While some individuals might find success with your approach, it’s crucial to understand that it’s not for one. Even a dumb phone alone is not the ultimate solution. There needs to be a proactive replacement with something useful and beneficial. For those struggling with self-control, creating an environment with fewer distractions is essential.

From your post, it appears you may be overestimating the degree of control individuals have over their actions. While some people possess greater self-control, our brains are extremely powerful at coming up with excuses, rationalizing the use of time-wasting apps like Facebook or Lemmy, even if “I” decided to avoid them. Most people fail trying to lose weight, because initial success is often followed by relapses.

It’s important to acknowledge that different strategies work for different individuals. Even the approach described in the video won’t work in isolation.

You don’t need that, just stop using those apps… don’t install games or use your smartphone for gaming or social stuff.

It’s akin to telling a depressed person: ‘just be happy.’ If they could be happy, they wouldn’t be depressed. The same holds true for these apps. While some individuals can quit them, for many of us, the temptation of cheap pleasure outweighs rational arguments. Maybe not immediately, but over time when the initial motivation fades. We have limited control over these impulses. That’s why creating conditions where such temptations are absent can be very helpful.

How did it backfire for YouTube? According to this source, YouTube has over 2 billion monthly users. Let’s assume that a significant portion of this user base is around 10%, as a substantial loss in ad revenues would be necessary for this situation to backfire. That would amount to 200,000,000 users.

Do we have data confirming that ad-blockers gained approximately 200,000,000 new installations over the past month, or is there any other evidence to support this claim?

I think that people compare cats to dogs as both are common pets. Dogs are very expressive, while with cats you have to pay attention and spend some effort to learn their behavior and habits. Many people don’t have time or interest for that.

“Turn off your ad blocked to prove that you believe in free speech.”

This is a hilarious level of argumentation. What’s quality of their content?

I’m surprised to hear that Brave is bug-free. Ads and crypto scam are doing miracles!

Let’s say that I trust Swiss laws more than other alternatives.