cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/6745228

TLDR: Apple wants to keep china happy, Stewart was going after china in some way, Apple said don’t, Stewart walked, the show is dead.

Not surprising at all, but sad and shitty and definitely reduces my loyalty to the platform. Hosting Stewart seemed like a real power play from Apple, where conflict like this was inevitable, but they were basically saying, yes we know, but we believe in things and, as a big company with deep pockets that can therefore take risks, to prove it we’re hosting this show.

Changing their minds like this is worse than ever hosting the show in the first place as it shows they probably don’t know what they’re doing or believe in at all, like any big company, and just going for what seems cool, and undermining the very idea of a company like Apple running a streaming platform. I wonder if the Morning Show/Wars people are paying close attention.

  • @SCB
    link
    English
    -1
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Slavery isn’t employment

    the condition of having paid work. “a fall in the numbers in full-time employment”

    • Patapon Enjoyer
      cake
      link
      English
      18 months ago

      You didn’t say employment. You said labor.

      • @SCB
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I said to employ labor.

        “Employ” is the verb form of the noun “employment.”

        Hope this helps.

        • Patapon Enjoyer
          cake
          link
          English
          0
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Sure. The context makes it mean something else however. To employ also means to make use of something. You don’t “provide employment to” labor, that would make no sense.

          Besides, is the alternative that you think any worker treatment is fine so long as it’s technically employment and not slavery? That’s a little fucked innit

          • @SCB
            link
            English
            1
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Rather than desperately trying to take me in bad faith, maybe read what I say.

            If someone agrees to a certain rate of pay, they are not being exploited. There is nothing unethical about the hiring. I am obviously pro regulations like worker safety.

            This is a really stupid discussion that should have been obvious if you weren’t trying to be a shit.

            • Patapon Enjoyer
              cake
              link
              English
              08 months ago

              If someone agrees to a certain rate of pay, they are not being exploited

              lmfao