What the hell you guys?

I hate how people try to resort to acts of violence in the name of religion, politics, "injustice" etc. to "try and alter society".

Supposing they don't realize but, basically as soon as you use violent methods to try and prove something to people it not only obscures your point, it weakens attracting support from most people. They associate the cause you were violent about with violent people and being an asshole and then... there you go.

That's why I prefer to merely make fun of the things I don't like about society.
What's still dangerous about that though is some people confuse their feelings/self boundary so they react as though every time you don't like something which they do like that it somehow means you are attacking them, their personhood, etc. and some people will insist that somehow not liking something means that you're going to go ballistic and do extremist type things, then they will badger you about how scary it is that you expressed you disliked something popular. People just need to chill.

I don't like the way some big businesses behave to create conditions which reduce market competition but that doesn't make me anti-capitalistic or an evil communist or some sort of totalitarian dirtbag. It just means I think that only having a few companies own everything and overtake other competitors reduces the amount of choices and the amount of opportunity for others to succeed. While it is ironic that the venue I choose to say this on is via a blog through a service by a web giant using technology that is also for the most part made by technology giants...- but that doesn't mean I hate them persay. Also, I really hope they don't censor this blog for being critical of some of the things they do. I just merely wish to highlight the observation that no, they aren't perfect. No, not every new web development is the best thing since sliced bread and that sometimes what is popular or tries to be super friendly can be very creepy and unsettling in its own way as well. Not every new device that changes the way you use the Internet is always a good thing either.

Example set #1:
1. I noticed many of the innovations made to interfaces tend to put accessibility into consideration last if at all.
2. Specifically, all these bright bright colors aren't always good for people with bad eyesight.
3. Flashing streaming results that reconstitute a page might be spiffy but it has a flicker effect that can be headache inducing which means perhaps then also seizure inducing for people with certain perceptual or neurological problems.
4. Touchscreens, okay, we get the idea everybody likes pushing out touchscreen devices. How the heck is a blind person supposed to use a touchscreen device? You can't exactly have a braille keyboard on a device that only uses a virtual keyboard.

Example set 2: hassle:
1. Predictive text:... On the bright side it can save time by subbing in the rest of what you were about to type so you don't have to... but on the negative side it is deciding what it thinks you mean for you and that can be somewhat frustrating or humorous when what it puts in isn't. Does anybody remember T9 on cellphones? Remember how silly it would be?
2. Highly visual click and scrollbased browsing replacing the traditional typing centric experience: Okay, sometimes having to move a page up and down to click on little pictures and dynamically scoot things around in a work area to use a program is a pain in the ass. Your eyes have to readjust and refocus each time and you have to keep track of exactly where on the page you were each time.
3. and the clicking? I wonder how many mice get burnt out trying to use some of these things.
a. It's cool sometimes but I think it would be a whole lot nicer to allow people the option of using both styles of doing things. It can't be good for eyesight.
b. Why the hatred of reading and typing? Should illiterate people who hate having to read and write be trying to look things up that are mainly reading material? No. I suppose that's why there's the huge switch to have everything be so very visual. c. Yes sometimes it looks a whole lot cooler but if you're trying to look up an article do you really want all kinds of whooshing garbage all around your visual range while you are trying to focus on the type?
4. Do results rearranging themselves as you type somehow magically not detract from the main article or what you were trying to type?
5. What about actually trying to see what it was you were looking for? I understand the incentive and need for advertisements. No qualms with that but who's going to ensure you still have access to actual information?
a. Why should you have to click several times to get to expand and article out to see it one paragraph or sentence at a time instead of a whole page?
b. It wrecks the coherency of a piece to have to do that and transition again and again each time (with a reload of the whole page each time in some cases no less). c. and if you try to flip back to the previous page you can't exactly see the whole thing at once, it might start you over at the beginning or force you to rewatch any advertisements during loading.
6. And the abundance of links to other things all around the edges of a page make trying to read something a bit of going through a minefield. You'd think you would want to rest your cursor on the side of a page so it didn't click on things inside the article to redirect you to other stuff and have to backtrack your way out to the article again, no? But there's always these huge sideways ads to things to subscribe to or buy along the edges of pages these days.
a. Also, some of that crud has viruses. How the heck is that being responsible?

7. Maybe the idea is that if you bombard people enough with advertisements while they are trying to look up information or read a page they will buy something they don't really want in the hopes of getting it to go away. Or get distracted from trying to maintain focus the entire time and meander off to readily prominent suggested commercial things all over the place.