My first instinct was to close the article as I didn't want to read a Republican virtue signaling to his audience. I wonder if they were trying to sound Republican?

The article itself is a nice, well interesting, dive into the topic; kinda unfortunate.

"Republican"?! US defaultism strikes again. He's in the UK, and he states his pronouns here https://danq.me/about/ so doesn't sound very "Republican" to me.

Funny, the tone sounded UK/Australian to me. Just be aware, beyond a surface level awareness there are very few people who know what a specific ideology in your country sounds like, or care enough to learn.

> I didn't want to read a Republican virtue signaling to his audience. I wonder if they were trying to sound Republican?

It would be very surprising behaviour for a British guy living in the UK

I've seen this sentiment on the left. I think the author just phrased it a little oddly.

Sometimes called "pink capitalism" or "rainbow capitalism", where a company will show the rainbow pride flag for Pride Month, but not put any more substantial effort towards diversity, plurality, LGBTQ rights, etc.

I expect nothing from companies, and it's nice to see that virtue signal. If they're signalling, it means they think we haven't been exterminated yet. But I don't expect good works from anything for-profit. It's just business.

Edit: The author using the phrase "surveillance capitalism" is generally a left wing thing. I don't hear right-wingers rallying against capitalism (let's not even get into the weeds of defining "capitalism" the word) even when they happen to oppose surveillance