Keep in mind that our voting system is actually built so the parliament represents the popular vote as closely as possible. It’s not just an assembly of winners of individual “winner takes all” decisions. The average being above 0 in the graph should indeed mean left parties would be in the majority more often than not.
Edit: Another comment reminded me that the graphs only show 18-29 year olds. That explains it somewhat.
The gap sounds plausible, but I highly doubt the overall positions relative to 0.
E.g., the Federal Republic of Germany has had conservative chancellors for 51 years out of the 75 since it was founded. We did not have a constant left majority (I assume that is what they mean by liberal, since the actual sense of the term doesn’t make sense as an opposite to “conservative”).
Edit: I fucked up, this is only about people below 30.
Only 63%?
Cable breaking from being bent in a weird way for too long.
Normal people have friends and family and would like to use social media to stay in touch with them.
Normal people stay in touch with their loved ones even if they are not on the same platform. You do not need everyday group chat noise for that.
Oh come on, that’s like “all politicians lie”. There is “I record every millisecond of your private life to sell to anybody with a fat enough wallet” evil and there is “I am raising prices this year because I can” evil. The two are not the same.
I’m convinced they’ll never figure out a practical solution to take technical drawings out to construction sites digitally (battery life, limited screen size, dirt, hazardous atmospheres, the unwillingness of my boss to pay for expensive specialized hardware …). Other than that I’m with you.
Nope. You cannot.
Of course they are. You can pay or consent to tracking.
You called bullshit on it being common on the continent, I provided examples from the continent.
At least one German outlet has been shown to still track you after paying. Just a bit less. So they use a rubber with a few holes poked in.
the user can simply choose not to read the article, so there’s an option where they don’t get fucked.
We are rapidly nearing a point where you can’t read online news from any major (ergo “widely considered somewhat credible”) source without one of those schemes. So I’d argue that the alternative is to just not get access to online news, and that may be considered too much pressure to still consider consent as voluntary.
Sadly, newspapers are not considered “platforms”. A platform is a site that publishes user generated content, so lemmy or facebook. And not all platforms are large platforms too.
So while this is a good first step, it doesn’t cover all online services.
It’s not a grey area, it’s clearly illegal (consent has to be given voluntarily. If you can’t use the site without paying, that’s not voluntary). Agencies so far just decided to look the other way and play dumb. There are lawsuits ongoing.
German news outlets all do it. The data protection agencies have sadly so far ruled it’s ok (there are still ongoing lawsuits afaik).
That explains it and I did indeed overlook it. Thanks for the heads up.