FfaerieOxide @ FfaerieOxide @kbin.social

I've been called "a giant faggot" but I'm medium at most. ♥️

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

324

Joined

2 yr. ago

Facebook is not (yet?) negatively impacting the fediverse. Fediverse users are.

Meta negatively impacts everything by being Meta. You should not cover for nor defend them.

Oohh, you read das Kapital

Where did I say I've read Das Kapital? Das Kapital isn't even the book I linked you.

If that's true, I hate it.

that's why you have to get as many people here before the last e phase ;)

You are arguing for drinking gasoline before the spark comes rather than setting out a sign banning flammable liquids.

You cannot out Meta Meta or use their desire to hurt you against them. You can only oppose them with hard walls and hard lines.

I dislike Facebook, so that's why I am here. But if the only way to stay in touch with people I know irl is on Threads, so be it.

Do you see how they are already using their size to control and negatively impact the fediverse? The very fact you are arguing that.

If you know them IRL, you can tell them IRL to get off of facebook.

If they won't well, either keep talking to them IRL or reexamine who your friends are.

entering the Threadiverse

That's not a fucking thing. Threads doesn't own the Fediverse and they clearly are not welcome on it either.

“perfection is the enemy of progress”, right?

Isn't there a difference between people starving when there isn't enough food and having more than enough food you allow to rot so a small percentage of people can live as kings?

You get how that is different, right?

How many people dying while there are resources to prevent their dying is too many?
Are unhoused people an acceptable sacrifice to Mammon in your view?

I call shenanigans!

Perhaps, but they are cheeky and fun-loving.

I refuse to respect corporations like I respect human beings, and I don’t think they deserve human rights or the influence they have over our government.

I don't think corporations are people either. You and I agree on that.

I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a "person"—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected.

At a base level it's the same underpinning that inform people's desire to be landlords.

Why is the entire burden of proof on me? Shouldn’t you have to prove I’ve never called a real person an “NPC?”

No, I shouldn't. I never claimed it was a particularly fair bet. Probably should check the terms before accepting.

Why do you assume people arguing (correctly) against the evils of capitalism want to go back to say feudalism and not progress toward a just system that respects universal human dignity and does not require human suffering to grease the wheels of machinery which lines a tiny % of pockets?

Compared to pre industrial humans, we live better than kings, and we work probably more like half less than they had to.

And yet with more than enough food to feed everyone and 30 times as many vacant homes per unhoused person, people still starve and die of exposure on the streets.

it doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.

I could forward you some reading if you'd like to be less ignorant, though I have my doubts you desire to be.

You almost sound like an AI bot, am I talking with an AI bot?

If you can't tell it sounds like I've passed the Turing, at least.

No, just when I find it humorous.

You find dehumanizing others humorous? You should work on being less terrible.

And I’d take that bet ;)

Prove you never have and I'd pay you, otherwise I will forward you a list of charities you can send your loss to. sarcastic smiley

What in the world has capitalism to do with this?

Nothing can be consensual under a system which privatizes the means of life and coerces behavior to attain access to natural resources everyone needs and no one made.

Called it. You’re a bot.

Do you always dehumanize those who disagree with you?

€6 says you've used the term "NPC" pejoratively.

MAID can't be consensual under capitalism, but all beings which exist have an inherent right to end their own existence whenever they decide to.

This wouldn't be a discussion if a 27 year old shot themself, huffed an asphyxiant, or jumped off something high.

Human rights don’t extend to machines.

Humans are machines. If ones made of metal become sentient why wouldn't they have rights?