stopdropandprole

I know it’s a hot take and not that serious, but I can’t help but read this as making excuses/validating inaction.

it smuggles in the implication that bothering to advocate for those 3 things (taxes, regulations, workers benefits) is a waste of time under broken capitalism. as in “why tinker with regulations if the system is inherently unjust?”

when in reality, arriving at a new economic system will almost certainly be a gradual process of normalizing pro-social policies and tax structures and regulations from within the current socioeconomic context we actually live in.

sure, Total Economic System Change is an admirable goal… but I’d be pleased to see even a smidge more taxes (on 1%), more regulation, more workers getting what they deserve in the meantime.

https://youtube.com/@plasticpills

driving with all the windows closed, AC blasting, dark tinted windows to block sunlight… seems reasonable to think the climate could have an impact.

Agreed. From ~1930 to the mid 60s, we were taxing almost everything over a certain amount (90+ %). In addition, corporate tax rates were significantly higher.

Besides the point really, we need a plutocrat tax/wealth tax, not income tax reform. It’s one of the few direct methods to redistribute the wealth theyve extracted from the 99% and decrease inequality.

Tax wealth, not workers!

you are “pretty sure”… that flying hundreds of aircraft at the limits of their acceleration and capabilities (to put on a dramatic show for spectators) at hundreds of air shows around the world… uses less fuel than a single private jet flying routine passenger deliveries ?

press X to doubt

the hardware, I’ve heard many speculate, is for collecting data needed to power embodied AI (actual robots).

so far, US-based “AI” has focused largely on LLMs and disembodied “intelligence”. this is just interacting with screens. but getting their proprietary AI models into a real body that moves in the real world (using motors, balance, gyroscopes, accelerometers) will require a ton of training data.

might be bullshit. who knows. either way the goals of AI companies is all the same imo: create perfect slaves to replace workers.

i could be mistaken but wasn’t this one of several investigations into Musk owned companies which was halted after the inauguration?

There were so many investigations against tech bros stopped in 2025, it’s hard to keep it all straight.

this is the correct analysis and it took way too much digging to find it

no control or support structures to address their problems

this is a real unmet need. but propping up AI chat bots as the solution, instead of structural changes is somewhat self-defeating. getting people to become dependent on chat bots is exactly the profit model these unethical corporations are counting on.

why are they hosting it on the fucking Internet? I just don’t understand the lack of concern for safety. a few years ago leading experts said AI is an existential threat, but I guess after enough rounds of investor funding, the risks magically all disappeared?!

so nice to see rational takes on killdozer.

i still see t-shirts trying to cast him as heroic or edgy or cool when the actual story plays out like a thin skinned entitled piss baby who thought the solution to petty personal grudges was a lone wolf rampage across town.

Epicureanism, in a nutshell

this is not the conversation ending truth-bomb some people make it out to be.

scholars have contested the selection methods and conclusions reached in that original survey/article. for example, several of the “successful” countries on their list have since regressed into dictatorships/unrest.

not trying to debate or be contrarian, but I think folks who lean heavily on the non-violence strategy should consider that the success of nonviolent moderate protest movements may have something to do with them being perceived as more palatable to the ruling class than the violent opposition alternatives. therefore, simply making violent alternatives widely known and believed to be credible threats, actually serves to push moderate people towards the less scary less radical faction of the movement.

so many of the world’s problems boil down to a handful of tech bros who made that book their entire personality.

congratulations on escaping the Rand death cult

iRiver= S tier mp3 nostalgia

the difference, is whether someone is punching up (ridiculing powerful billionaires) vs punching down/sideways (diverse and marginalized peeps). seems like pretty basic and consistent application of a worldview to me.

no comment on celebrities. i don’t give two flying fucks at rolling donut about celebrities.

you can also tag people on Lemmy, or at least I can. look for the About User menu then “Add Tag” or “Tag user” from their profile

deleted by creator

interesting note: a flavor of techno fascism actually started in the 30s, it was called Technocracy, Inc.

The technocracy movement was a social movement active in the United States and Canada in the 1930s which favored technocracy as a system of government over representative democracy […] a California engineer, invented the word technocracy in 1919 to describe “the rule of the people made effective through the agency of their servants, the scientists and engineers”

here’s an article explaining how Musk, Thiel, and Andreessen (and other tech billionaires) have adopted a similar philosophy with the “Charter Cities” ancap utopianism they’re working to replace democracy with.

A 1930s movement wanted to merge the US, Canada and Greenland. Here’s why it has modern resonances