I wonder if neanderthals would’ve liked casu martzu cheese then.

I think the reasoning is something like this: these companies employ such call center employees for a reason, either they legally have to for one reason or another or they’ve determined that in some way, it is more profitable to have the capacity for people to call them than not. If the call centers are swamped, then they still cost the company money, but their benefit to the company is reduced, because the “real” calls can’t get through in a timely fashion. As such, it’s in the company’s interest to avoid having people spam them, and if the policy those people want changed won’t really cost the company anything to change, then just doing that might be the most profitable option for them.

if youre frozen in time, doesnt that imply that your neurons and the cell activity that feeds them are frozen too, and thus that you cant think to perceive being so frozen anyway?

is it realistic for them to be designed sanely tho, and remain so even if they were? Remember, the people making such a “you must pass test to vote” law would be the politicians people are voting for, so they would have a huge incentive to mess with the process in such a way as to make it easier for the demographics that tend to vote for them and harder for the ones that dont. Adding an additional time hurdle like a test also has effects regardless of the likelihood of passing it, for example, it makes retirees with more free time to even do the test be more likely to qualify than someone too tired after working long hours to bother.

In the US anyway, its historically been those very people that have tried things like education requirements or tests for a person to be allowed to vote, specifically to create an excuse to deny anyone that wasnt white.

Is the one on the right even real? Looks like that “waxy” vibe AI images sometimes have.

Is cane sugar actually any healthier than HFCS?

It was more like hyperbole on my part, I was using that as a catch all for whatever kinds of things a business could abuse it’s position by doing. I didn’t want to just say “be able to do businesses or not do business with whoever they want”, because I wanted to say something more broad than just applying to payment processors, even if choosing not to do business with someone and thereby shutting them out of much of the economy is the way a payment processor would do this .

I don’t think that businesses, not being individuals, should actually have the same rights as individuals I guess. I don’t really agree with the idea that a corporation should be able to do whatever it likes by default, simply because I think corporations in general have too much power to be trusted with such.

I mean, when your service is fundamental enough to the economy, and centralized enough to make just going to an alternative a major hassle, if an alternative without a similar policy even exists, then why should they get that say? The power to effectively ban the sale of certain types of thing, or force media platforms to censor certain types of content, is the sort of power we generally reserve for governments, not private entities that can do whatever they want. Honestly they’re important enough these days that they should basically be treated like some sort of public utility in my view.

What if it was a platonic love potion?