Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)DJ
Posts
1
Comments
50
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • His brother? Spared "no expense" building a state of the art theme park that ended up killing so many people (and almost killing his own grandkids) before it opened that they had to scrap the whole thing. And it was a damn good thing his granddaughter knew Unix systems (and wasn't eaten first), or it surely would've killed more.

    You got me at first and I almost went looking for references of David's evil brother. TIL the actor who played the character of John Hammond in the film Jurassic Park and its sequel was David Attenborough's elder brother.

  • Wouldn't it be the other way around? I think Musk would rather have TSLA bagholders shareholders prop up his private companies, of which he likely owns a higher percentage than Tesla. The pitch could be that xAI has what Tesla needs for some of the vaporware he keeps promising and that Tesla should therefore acquire xAI.

  • Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I can't even believe the trump admin is going after tech giants.

    I share the disbelief. I think it is mostly a power play against not just Google, but all tech giants, which must be watching this closely, given most of them operate in a similarly anticompetitive manner: kiss the ring or else. The Trump administration could give Google reprieve in exchange for axing DEI further and helping push their political agenda.

    I can't imagine anything the admin does will be good for society so maybe its safe to assume they will be broken up so elon can buy a chunk?

    I think so too: if Google doesn't satisfy Trump and his administration, parts of it will be forcibly sold as private equity, outside of shareholder scrutiny and beyond the reach of the SEC. Such a private company would be easier to control than a publicly traded one.

  • I think what @Naich@lemmings.world means is that the recent UK Supreme Court ruling gives some cover to Starmer, allowing him to pin some of the dissatisfaction with his eventual acquiescence to US pressure on the judiciary (even though Labour, being in control of the legislature, could fix the laws instead of washing their hands…).

  • I for one find “Genocide Don” quite catchy. The problem with this label is that the man himself and most of his supporters will likely just shrug it off as if it weren't worth denying; it would be like calling a paid assassin a “murderer”.

  • That's exactly it. Owners want people desperate, because desperate people work for less. As you point out, they start with “illegals”, but they will eventually come for the old and the disabled too, because some people will have to pick up where Social Security left and care for them and, in doing so, will become even more desperate. Who will risk their job fighting for their rights knowing that not only their own livelihood, but also that of their old mother or their disabled brother is on the line? We need to be clear: this is not about government efficiency or even a crackdown on “illegals”, but a war — the owners' war on us workers and our kin.

    They've been manufacturing consent in a similar way in Germany, agitating against immigrants and dubbing some or all people in your situation “Sozialschmarotzer” –“social parasites”–. Under the pretense of fighting those threats they conjure, they've been dismantling social security — without DOGE's viciousness, but bit by bit.

  • All that big talk about forcing countries to negotiate

    Trump indeed touts tariffs as international leverage, but they're just as much if not more of a domestic power play that forces US businesses to kiss the ring in order to get exemptions. Businesses that pledge allegiance keep their supply chains and survive, whereas those that don't satisfy the Mango get to pay tariffs and compete with exempted businesses in a weakening consumer market with decreasing purchasing power.

  • In his first term, Trump increased both the budget deficit and total outstanding debt with his unsustainable fiscal policy. Now, his antagonistic and erratic trade policy is raising Treasury yields. He and his political project are brewing the very debt crisis they keep fearmongering about. The solutions they contemplate, like currency devaluation, messing with the Federal Reserve, perpetual or century bonds and a partial default on repayment obligations to China, further erode trust in the global financial system that underpins American power.

  • World News @lemmy.world

    US cuts off intelligence-sharing with Ukraine