It’s not free. They’re also completely capable of including it in a package or bundle. I don’t understand what’s difficult about that way of thinking. You buy a computer which has the operating system so you’re paying for the hardware and software. So why not provide cloud storage included in that? Why am I the asshole with that way of thinking?

Let’s talk about Microsoft specifically. They have the most notable OS in world, a gaming console, word, doc, and they have stock in Google. You telling me they can’t afford free cloud storage?

So then when you buy a product, you’re not allowed to expect product service? And open cloud shouldn’t be allowed to be expect when you purchase a product? What’s the issue with cloud sourcing being involved in product purchase? When you buy a new computer, you’re also paying for an OS. What’s the problem in expecting a full use of their services when you purchase a PC?

Are you trying to create a narrative because you have no other way to logically argue with me by chance? You see how this works?

I’d rather have your business model because I at least know my data isn’t going to be used for reasons that I didn’t agree to. However that’s just an opinion I have on cloud function and storage

Yeah. Not a good comparison

So you’re comparing things that have been paid for to things that haven’t been paid for?

Not a false equivalence at all. People before you created this platform, you paid for said platform (let’s say windows. You purchase a prebuilt pc, so the operating system and access to the services are paid for at initial purchase (key point). THEN Microsoft says "Hey this service is involved. Check it out. We’ll store what you need. Download and register here… Sweet! It’s setup you got your files uploaded… Now pay me and I’m not letting you see or use the files without paying me.

How is that business model justified?

So someone who works at a grocery store is paid to help you load your groceries in the car, but you don’t tip them. Does that mean they’re allowed to take whatever groceries they already loaded back into the store?

So if someone is paid to help you load your groceries, and then because you don’t tip them, that means they’re allowed to take the groceries that they loaded back into the store?

Ok. So let’s say you’re doing some heavy shopping and you’re struggling with it. Items are falling all over the place, you can’t keep it all in your hands, and you’re scared you’re going to lose an item. I walk up to you and say "Hey if you pay this miniscule amount, I’ll help you out and hold on to the items for you. I could use my one hand to help you for free, but if you want both hands, then it costs you, but the items are still yours. You have proprietary right to the items, but if you start to pay, and then don’t pay this one time, then I’m going to hold on to all the things I have in this one hand. Nothing is going to happen to the stuff. I’m not going to take ownership, I’m not going to resell it because I have looked at what you have and have gotten the exact same purchases. Just going to keep it so it so you can’t have it until you pay me.

How much sense does that make as a business model? Especially with companies that are getting plenty of money from other divisions where the service would be sustainable, but they just won’t. Just need to get more and more money.

In essence, capitalism already controls what you do with your personal data, we should all be upset about that.

And with your storage argument, they should absolutely give you a window to remove your belongings before they lock it. I know way too many storage places that will lock your unit the day after your payment date was without notification because they can get quick cash if they auction units off, so most storage places don’t want the individual to pay as long as the rest do pay. Their favorite thing to do is put payment dates on Thursdays. That way by Friday when the person doesn’t pay, they can lock it, and it’s inaccessible until Monday. That is some petty shit that businesses pull. The whole “civilized” system is set up to work against people with money problems. I won’t go into detail of what I mean anymore than I already have, but all you really did was point out 2 problems to try and find a comparison against one.

The biggest crooks I know of in my experience is cloud-share server owners, tow truck companies, and storage units

But they have control to your cloud files and they can and will lock those files from being pulled from the cloud

Here’s something that I think about that’s weird. With onedrive, if you don’t pay the subscription fee, they hold your files hostages until you do. That’s called a business model, but when people hold their files hostage it’s called ransomware. Weird how that works isn’t it?

What level of chemistry? How I explained it is exactly what’s needed. Stop overthinking the obvious. And what i explained is cheaper than a car. Like i don’t want to be disrespectful, but did you start to argue without thinking your argument all the way through? And I don’t know if you know or not, but the combination of ammonia and bleach makes this little known biological agent called mustard gas

Draino and aluminum foil can make an explosive that sprays hot acid. A styrofoam cup, a paper clip, and an outlet can start an untraceable fire. High proof liquor, a bottle, and a rag can make a molotov. Guns. Carbon Monoxide, Hydrogen Sulfide, a mixture of ammonia and bleach, magnesium and oxygen.

There’s plenty of ways to mass murder without a car

DISCLAIMER: I DO NOT CONDONE ANY OF THESE METHODS. MURDER IS TAKING A PERSON’S LIFE AND SENDING A CRIPPLING SHOCKWAVE TO INNOCENT PEOPLE THAT DON’T DESERVE YOUR RAGE

Read a study earlier that stated that the majority of high corporate execs are most likely psychopaths

Personally don’t think this is a fuck cars issue. If someone wants to kill, they’ll find a way to do it no matter the medium

Your anti social statement is very fair lol.

However what I was trying to say is not necessarily “we don’t need a fire department” but moreso "the individual citizen shouldn’t be paying for the fire department with their income. Nearly 55% of US citizens make less than $50k a year and the average income per household (in the previous percentage) is around $35k. So why should the individual spend their little bit of hard earned money on taxes when everything else is getting taxed as well?

I don’t get why people are so afraid of Libertarians when it comes to social philosophies. Leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone. You want me to do something I don’t want to do, pay me. Weird how Libertarians get criticized for that when literally everyone has had that mindset with one thing or another in their life