HobbitFoot

joined 2 years ago
[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 4 points 2 weeks ago

Drat! You got me!

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah. The teller doesn't get paid enough for this bullshit, but the possibility of setting up a trust may be enough for a bank to try to sell services.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 5 points 2 weeks ago

They can probably use Epstein's tapes.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 13 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It is the only thing conservatives/fascists have left.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Had an interesting conversation with a Syrian when flying from Kuwait to Jordan. I didn't know Arabic; he didn't know English. We used Google Translate to talk.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 4 points 2 weeks ago

The term was used correctly. The idea is to use Threads as a way to capture people who wanted to onboard to Mastodon and those who wanted an alternate to Twitter.

Over time, Threads could demand that Meta's app be used to access Threads, allowing Meta to control the algorithm. It could also start strategically defederating from other instances over time.

After a while, Meta would likely only allow government and major companies' official accounts to federate with it. Meanwhile, Meta would control the customer base.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Not really. I'd argue the dot com bust was worse due to the quantity of websites that died because they didn't actually have a business model.

What we're seeing is a tech industry where all the tech is on the right side of the S curve and trying one last stab at a technology that may be on the left side.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 4 points 2 weeks ago

But it isn't about creating quality results. It is about creating good enough results where the cost of failure in AI over humans is lower than the cost of humans over AI.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 21 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

This has been Silicon Valley's MO for generations.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 weeks ago

In the real world, your life depends on being accepted into that group or migrating to another place while having huge losses and problems due to it later on.

Just because the punishment isn't as strong doesn't mean that the system functions differently. You are also going to run into issues where established communities may have issues moving.

I'm not sure i agree because an admin can also be protested against and they can share ownership

But that isn't baked into Lemmy. That is a decision you made outside of Lemmy. Even then, is there a case where your instance could run without you? If not, you are still acting as an enlightened dictator.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 9 points 2 weeks ago

The problem for Hasbro is that, right now, the company doesn't have that much in non WotC moneymakers and hasn't had it for years. There have been attempts by activist investors to push for having WotC demerged from Hasbro so WotC isn't subsidizing the rest of Hasbro. The across-the-board cuts were Hasbro leadership trying to placate investors, but they cut muscle and bone from WotC for some reason instead.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Part of the reason why I'm arguing against economic terms is because it doesn't really give context into the power dynamics in how an instance is run. At the core of most instances on Lemmy, a head admin dictates the rules of their instance and it is take it or leave it for everyone else that wants to participate.

Think of it like this, if the head admin wanted to make a decision against all other admins and mods, what would happen? Likely, which has happened previously to other instances on Lemmy, the head admin wins out and everyone else either conforms or has to leave. Labor doesn't become ownership.

Unless an instance has a corporate structure which distributes power, it is an autocracy by definition.

view more: ‹ prev next ›