trailing9 @ trailing9 @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

430

Joined

2 yr. ago

So that's it.

Here, you are willing to suggest death to resolve conflicts.

There is also this reference:

A Two hustlegrind comment chains comment where you, as I interpret it, reject competition as a tool to prevent market dominating rent seeking.

The upvotes reaffirm you.

From my perspective that's fundamentally wrong. You are either able to turn everybody into a friend and thus don't need conflicts, or you manage conflicts by distributing power.

If I don't see the light and you know how to turn the world into a better place, good luck for your approach.

Prepare another NO U answer. That comment is bullshit unless the Great Egress has actual meaning. In that case, please elaborate. Otherwise try again. How do you want to resolve the surveillance state?

I would like to know how you want to resolve the surveillance state.

Putting me into that clichee of a tech bro as if I don't care about anything else, how is that not dehumanising?

There are plenty of open issues that you have chosen to ignore while you enjoyed dwelling in insults. I get the hang of it but let's not pretend that's me who is dehumanizing.

You used that before. Are you chatgpt? Being ignorant is not an action.

Read the room. It's me who is upvoting you.

Nobody is following this track because it's rooted in a big misunderstanding that you are unwilling to let go. The other replies to my comment are far more interesting.

You are the ignorant creep if you think that that quote was my opinion. It's me putting your words in your mouth. But good to know that you recognize incoherence when you think it's coming from me.

Yes, that's you. Maga by spreading empty phrases. The billionaires will pay for dismantling the police state.

Good quotation skills. If only you would care as much as you pretend to do.

You keep insulting me because I mistook you as the very thing you hate the most, a profit seeking hustler. I still think asking about the other 99.9% is difficult to associate with the danger of oppression when the context is recreating the pluralistic internet. But now I know better.

You won't leave the house because, without tech, the majority of humans will starve to death.

As you wrote in another thread, you want to leave the police surveillance state. It's a bit late for that, isn't it?

Instead, you take solace in having put a hustle bro in his place while all you did was showing that small incentives are dangerous because people find a way to hate everything.

By leaving the house... Do you have a plan or are you hoping that things work out because things are not transactional and everything can happen?

I read it in an interview years ago.

The office suits and the browsers are indeed among the apps that were taken over. The money was made by all the other commercial apps, and games.

I should say that I don't support that abuse of power.

I didn't excuse the vaccine lobbying. You are stuck in your first judgment. If you want to nag me then it works because BG is no hero of mine.

You are right about me caring about profits though. Logistics is everything. How do you want to create something without a positive resource balance?

Still wondering, what's the entire point of OP's text? I guess you focus on the evil domination of evil corporations. How do you want to resolve it if not with small initiatives?

Rereading the text, I see something else. He complains about negativity and corporations stifling small initiatives. Look what you are spreading about my comment that reaffirms small initiatives.

I hope that you can laugh about yourself, because I do, slightly.

Can't you stop being stuck at me mentioning BG? You made it clear that you don't care about profits but about abuse. Let's figure out something exciting.

Not my favorite anything.

About that money on the table, that's for building a platform. A vaccine is no platform. That's why he took it.

It shows how calculating he is. It also shows how few compassion is needed to build a platform.

To add another hustle platitude: imagine what a person with compassion could build.

Winning in that context meant creating something exciting, for everybody.

If he then asks what everybody but the winner gets, besides that new exciting technology, then what else does he expect but profits?

What's the hustle? When I say that OP should try for himself or when I reply to your question, suggesting that the created things could become the reward?

Don't you believe that the fediverse will grow and that there are still many opportunities left?

You are projecting. You asked about profits and you introduced homeless people as the ones who cannot handle this debate.

Now you are derailing with more insults.

Let's stay on topic. You want profits and I suggested that you should try to build a platform to make money.

Can you handle that thought?

Changed. Better?

I forgot the pedophile allegations and haven't heard about the eugenics. The critique is correct and that background information makes me feel bad for the phrasing.

The phrasing was meant for the billionaire part, though. When a person is all about making money and that person stresses how important it is not to be greedy when building a platform, then that's something to remember.

Could you elaborate, please? You have introduced the clichee of a homeless person. Your point only works if that person has such a tough life that they don't have the time or mental energy to spend on vague ideas.

The key part is that Bill Gates made the conscious decision to leave profits on the table for others. I haven't heard that advice from anybody else.

That said, there are many more evil things like breaking the platform promise and taking over app categories. But there is no need to copy those ideas.