Many smart TVs have firmware that interfere with your ability to switch sources using the remote for your cable service provider, or causes it to default to a specific source menu or app, or auto-switch between sources when it thinks it’s “detecting” them, even if you were actually using the other one.

And older people don’t know how to navigate the new user interfaces that come pre-installed on these smart TVs, especially if they have several connected devices on different ports. Have you had to walk a customer over the phone through using the Video Input button on their cable service remote, only to discover the TV software doesn’t allow 3rd party remotes to access the video input menu; because only the TV remote they lost is able to access that menu?

Or had to look up an article on a customer’s brand of smart TV, and walk them through disabling specific tv settings buried in their menu that prevent the TV from properly detecting and switching between sources, or having to mess with the TV closed captions, because they’re somehow interfering with the closed captions settings on their cable box.

I have. SmartTV software is occasionally a nightmare to negotiate with when trying to get it to work with a customer’s STB or their wifi, or what have you.

There is some merit to the classification, considering people in “2nd/3rd world countries” walk into grocery stores in the US and are so overwhelmed by all the abundant meat and produce and clothes that are freely accessible, that they have to go back outside to collect themselves. It’s not your ethnicity that determines if a country is a 1st/2nd/3rd world country. it’s how far their infrastructure has advanced, and their quality of living. Don’t like it, become a politician or businessman, do your darndest to be successful, and then make it your purpose in life to use your wealth/influence to advance infrastructural development in countries that don’t have the same quality of life as countries like Japan or the US.

YSK the original creators of the Honey extension are the ones who designed it that way from the getgo. The important thing is they are also the creators of the new Pie AdBlock extension that is being prolifically advertised on YouTube. And the Pie extension does the same damn things as the Honey extension, despite being an ad blocker.

So far, all I’ve found is a 2018 publication by the Police Executive Research Forum, entitled “The Changing Nature of Crime And Criminal Investigations”. It’s a 67 page document, and I’m curious to see if it discusses how their investigation tactics may have changed, and if so, whether the aforementioned tactic is mentioned as being included.

Another comment way down claims it’s standard operating procedure for social media sites to disable/hide and account of a highly publicized murderer, particularly during investigations. However, the provided no examples nor sources or technical documents that detail this as something that is genuinely done as a standard procedure.

I’m kinda gonna do my own research on that, but I feel the validity of Stack’s actions would to some degree depend on the results of researching that claim, and whether or not that is true.

It’s kinda difficult to research something like that though when most highly publicized murders predated social media in its current form, so it would be hard to have a lot of examples despite there being a decent number of people who fit the bill, ironically.

I’m starring this cause I want to look into this myself, and if I find any technical sources that address this claim and actually detail this as a SOP, I’ll reply with that source later, or otherwise reply with “I didn’t find anything.”

Actually, they got them to shoot gun-wielding home invaders who threaten (if not attempt to murder) their family members.

This is the equivalent of a bank robber standing in a vault, filling his bag full of jewels. One of the hostages yelling “You can’t do this, it’s illegal.” Some other guy yells “…and yet…” minutes before police sirens can be heard outside.

I look forward to Mangiine catching wind of this, which is basically theft, and adding it to the laundry list of things to be tried in court.

Righteous censorship is only “righteous” because everyone else is prevented from saying otherwise.

The presumption or admission of guilt does not and should not justify violating the Creative Commons License, nor perpetrating any illegal behavior agains any individual(s).

If JK Rowling went out and robbed a bank, or murdered an ex-Husband, in no world or timeline would that give a member of her publishing company the right to scratch out her name from any of her books and replace it with their own or someone else’s.