Well “conservative” (i.e. “Republican”) has shifted to such a weird place that people who aren’t weird probably feel compelled to call themselves “liberal” (probably meaning they’ll vote for Democrats).
Well “conservative” (i.e. “Republican”) has shifted to such a weird place that people who aren’t weird probably feel compelled to call themselves “liberal” (probably meaning they’ll vote for Democrats).
I’m a liberal dude who earned enough that my wife could stay at home and raise our kids until corporate greed gave me a one two punch of rapacious price increases (because they could get away with it) and stagnant wages (because they expect me to put up with it). She was doing a lot of work on the household all the time.
Luckily she went back to work after our kids became much more self sufficient and could participate in taking care of the house.
Never thought of myself as king of the house.
(She the Queen, though)
It would be wild if stuff like this is some proof of life after death.
Hmmm maybe we should ignore #1 and focus on #5 then
This is Zuck’s characterisation. No direct quotes. No attachments (that I’ve seen). He calls it pressure. He says they wanted to censor “satire & humor.” In fact this BS letter is what the original article quoted.
If Mastodon wins out in the long run the only reason will be persistence.
All these other “like Twitter but ______” micro blogging or whatever sites only stay viable while they’re profitable.
If Bluesky or Threads become (net) unprofitable, they’ll die. Mastodon is already unprofitable, so that can’t kill it.
I think we could compete with #1 just by word of mouth.
For #2 some person or group needs to develop a Mastodon app (FOSS obviously) that has a “just do this part for me” option, probably automatically enabled.
#3 is on us. We have to do what we can to make Mastodon (and Lemmy) more open and accepting without falling pretty to the paradox of tolerance.
#4 is hard… Although I think if Mastodon follows or tries to replicate the “early” Facebook user experience where most or all of the content people got was from people they follow, that could be better. The only challenge is that algorithms tickle our anger/hate/disgust impulses to drive and maintain engagement. That’s some very strong “lizard brain” stuff.
So… let’s get going y’all! :)
I love how he just uncritically and with absolute credulity accepts excerpts from a letter written by Zuck with no supporting evidence, no examples of what “pressure” looked like, etc.
I can’t believe these people are still so butt hurt about the perfectly reasonable actions taken by the US and State governments and governments worldwide in response to a once in a century global respiratory DEADLY pandemic that killed millions and millions of humans.
And as far as FB (and other social media) goes, fuck em. And fuck the users. Types of speech can be illegal. Defamation (lying about someone) and false advertising (lying about a product or service) can be illegal even though it’s definitely speech. These have “lying” in common, which to me implies there must be something about lying (specifically misrepresenting reality) that weakens typical 1st Amendment protections.
But it’s clear what this guy is most sad about is the traffic he got while his article about Woodstock going on during a lull in the comparatively mild pandemic that was “active” at the time (no meaningful H3N2 activity in the US at the time) went away when FB rightly changed the algorithm to not boost his stupid irrelevant “analysis.”
But people like the writer of this article are either too addled by conspiracy galaxy brain or too committed to lying for money to care that they could really hurt people with their bullshit.
This guy needs to go to something less harmful like selling homeopathic tinctures or lying about the moon landing or flat earth or something.
Privatizing anything will lead to higher prices.
The claim (which I think we should be comfortable calling a “lie” at this point) is that services provided by the government are almost inherently wasteful. Conservatives (it’s always conservatives) believe that civil servants (our neighbors) are overpaid and lazy. They believe that top level bureaucrats don’t have incentives for innovation and cost/waste minimization, and that top level executives in a for profit corporation do.
And the additional claim (“lie”) is that commercial profit incentives de facto lead to improved customer (citizen) outcomes.
However, I’ve never seen any long term data that supports ANY transition from public to private leading to either better innovation OR internal performance OR customer outcomes. I’ve also never seen data supporting the reverse (converse? inverse?) contention that nationalizing something corporate leads to worse innovation, performance, or outcomes.
Just for clarity I’m not looking for “data” from kleptocracies, oligarchies, military juntas, or other non free, non democratic, arguably non market based countries.
So basically only NATO, maybe EU, North America, Australia, Japan, South Korea… And I bet such data doesn’t exist (or exposes the lie).
Hasn’t every modern Attorney General been a Republican anyway?
Hey as long as the CCP doesn’t send troops and equipment into Taiwan, they have nothing to worry about.
When a foreign country invades, it’s absolutely fair by all rules of warfare to strike back inside their borders and even capture or destroy their territory.
When it’s time for hostilities to conclude, that captured/destroyed land can make a good “demilitarized zone” perhaps overseen by an international peacekeeping force.
Oh I call the cables I use to wire up my controllers “suicide cords” because it’s just the hot, neutral, and ground hanging out one end, waiting to touch me…
Слава Україні!
One thing that has started bugging me this election cycle is the term “middle class.” I feel stupid for not realizing it sooner, but your point about a single earner supporting a whole family with a house and 2.5 kids and usually 2 cars is incredibly important.
Is there a meaningfully large middle class in America any more, at least in those terms? I know people who manage to fund a whole household on their salary alone but those are low-ish 6-figure salaries (~$170k). Even then, a few curveballs come in and suddenly they’re screwed.
We need to recouple the productivity of the American worker with their income. We need more and stronger unions. We need to abolish so called “right to work” laws. We need to override Citizens United. We need to break up these huge monopolies & oligopolies.
We can do some of that if we elect Harris/Walz.
Ah nothing like effete dilettante artists telling us bumpkins that what we like to watch isn’t really art and we should go lock ourselves in a dark room to watch a black and white film that’s mostly exposition about morality given over long zooms on broken furniture or swooning women or an old man smoking a pipe.
Sorry dude but the high tech equipment we have in theaters should mostly be used to blast our eyeballs and ears into oblivion. I’ll watch deep, moving art pieces on my home television.
If (hopefully when) Trump loses he now has the perfect scapegoat though: Just Dance Vance
Also I think since his lineage is moonshine runners from Appalachia he’s a hillbilly, not a redneck
Yes he could lose Florida! Meatball Ron won his first term like 50.5% to 49.5%. Florida is a swing state, but Democrats are so dysfunctional statewide that they can’t organize a two person picnic.
I think that’s changing with the March For Our Lives kids coming of age.
The Harris campaign needs to take all this money they’re getting and invest it in states Biden got 45% or higher in 2020. They can get those states.
Guys I found JD’s Lemmy account…
The behavior doesn’t stop but it does start with the crazy growth spurt in height that is pretty unique to teenage boys (AMAB). Suddenly things that were way out of reach become reachable, like in the course of 6 months.
Whatever he needs to do to get elected to avoid Republican control of the Senate. Yeah it’ll suck if he is one of the saviors of the filibuster. But it’ll suck more if Republicans are in charge of the Senate.