On the one hand, yes, it's a solid alternative because it's decentralized and can even be untraceable (see Monero), but on the other hand, it's been under attack for the past years. I would disagree it's censorship-resistant, because if you make it illegal or hard to buy and sell crypto, few would be dedicated enough to go around that. Moreover, your proposed solution would still rely on some gateway between crypto and fiat, which would be vulnerable to pressure.
Words are defined and redefined based on their real world usage, so if there were enough people describing themselves as dragons, the definition could be updated to account for that. Denying or ridiculing novelty or unorthodoxy would hamper progress in any movement, be it for religious freedoms or trans rights.
Women exist. Dragons do not.
Exist in what sense? Again, is it rooted in something like biology or social assignment in your view, or is it based on the existence of people self-identifying as such? If the former, why do you not take issue with singular they? If the latter, what's the difference between that and "dragon"? Would you argue there are no people who genuinely use "dragon" as their pronoun? There are certainly quite a few who use "fae/faer", so it wouldn't be a significant leap.
Would it be transphobic to say "I'll use she/her for you but I don't believe you're a woman, as that's against the objective reality of biology"?
"whataboutism is effective propaganda". No, it's a reminder to address the actual argument, not talk about America lynching negroes.
Obviously. On PC, Steam alone takes 30%. Everything she gets though? Likely used for something horrible.
The main maintainer of this instance and PrivacyGuides, Jonah, was last active on reddit just days ago, but a year ago on Lemmy. Clearly it's not a priority for him.
By the way, it's the same website that scrubbed the section on alternatives to the big tech social networks like Twitter and Reddit, making the wild claim that there's no practical difference between them and the alternatives. They argued that the public nature defeats the point of privacy, but refused to account for the fact that the amount of personal and other data collected and sold by the corporations is multitudes more than what is collected by the likes of Lemmy.
Two of the reasons I'd never use it. The other is not wanting to support the Google monopoly.
That logic makes absolutely no sense. Look into Google before you take issue with Mozilla.
Mastodon allows you to transfer your followers when you migrate, so it's not a big deal if you change your mind about the first instance you had chosen.
It has nothing to do with privacy. Telegram is an old-school social network in that it doesn't even require that you register to view the content pages. It's also a social network taken to the extreme of free speech absolutism in that it doesn't mind people talking openly about every kind of crime and their use of its tools to make it easier to obtain the related services. All that with no encryption at all.
I think the part about exclusives and other claims is just a way to fight the cognitive dissonance of seeing something good but having spent so much time and money on something else. Always being in attack mode distracts them and others from focusing on the problems of Steam.