racsol

joined 1 year ago
[–] racsol@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Not easy, I agree.

I've been without any Meta services for 2 years already. In my experience, people have been more understanding regarding that than I initially imagined.

I believe that the choice can be made so I did. I still think most people can. That doesn't mean I don't respect the reasons anyone might have to stay.

I just strongly disagree that people don't have a choice.

[–] racsol@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Indeed. I can't know for sure. But the GDPR is supposed to make that illegal.

That's a different conversation.

[–] racsol@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I agree, but it's not like using Meta is mandatory. You can decide not to use their services.

[–] racsol@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This price is absurd, sure. Even if I trusted Meta, there's no way I'm paying that.

Having said that, they can charge whatever they want for the service. As company, their prices are up them.

I don't get why you (no OP specifically, but in general) put it as if you must pay or give up your rights. We can just not use Meta, as many of us already been doing.

GDPR should be there to protect and enforce informed consent. Not to remove people's ability to decide.

Why sholuld we regulate Meta's prices and not whatever other suscription service exists out there?

[–] racsol@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know about initial costs, but the main problem with wind/solar is they cannot be scaled up/down on-demand. The depend on the weather and that does not align with energy demands throught the day.

As long as we cannot store energy at-scale, we will have to rely in another source of energy we can ramp up/down depending of the energy demands (being fossil fuels or, preferibly, nuclear)

view more: ‹ prev next ›