I think you’re right if the goal is to stop them all together.
But what we can do is stop people from sending them around and saying that it’s true/actually the person.
Once they’ve turned it from a art project into a weapon, it should have similar consequences to “revenge porn.”
Wonderful in theory, but in practice it’s a dumpster fire. Quick, mainstreamm-acceptable takes are incentived, and nuanced, alternative viewpoints are nearly impossible.
If it were all for hobby stuff, it would be fine, but when this is how most people get their news, it’s not good.
These folks won’t witness it either. Not with that eye anyway.
Not the original person you responded to, but I type 120ish wpm. The trick is to try to tap into the same part of your brain that verbalizes words when you talk, rather than the part that composes stuff when you write.
As with most things, “free market” is what they demand when they don’t get have access to the market or can’t command the whole market.
Once they have access or enough of a percentage to set the prices, suddenly the best thing is high barriers to entry and whatever else will help them maintain inelastic demand.
It’s literally what’s happening.
Texas used the same concept to empower private people to sue abortion providers and receivers under civil law since they couldn’t do it criminally.
The country as a whole has done it for a long time with cellphone data, the five eyes alliance, etc.
They have access to information they’re barred from getting directly themselves, and they get it from private companies. Spying by proxy.
100%. Most business is just advanced sophistry at this point. Marketing and advertising serves a useful purpose for new products, when the market isn’t aware that it exists.
But by quantity and cost, most advertising is just social manipulation and is effectively an extra drain on the economy.
I saw one program that Rick rolled Bluetooth device lists.
Almost across the board, new technology is used to spread two things: religious dogma and porn.
And the farmer’s almanac, but mostly the Bible and porn.
Not just their business practices, but also just the oculus purchase.
I already had an oculus. I was told (via press release) that I wouldn’t have any issues with not having a Facebook account…only for them to turn around a little while later and require a Facebook login.
This describes what I want - being able to have relatively blank walls/spaces that light up and fill up with content when you’re wearing the headset.
It’s social media in the technical definition - it’s a place to view media, both entertainment and news, with commentary, groups, the ability to follow someone, etc. Which makes it social.
But yeah, it’s not quite like Facebook/Instagram/LinkedIn. A little bit like Twitter though.
It’s all the same thing. He “offered” to buy Twitter and then tried to back out. Market manipulation.
The board of Twitter forced the sale, because they had every right and responsibility to their shareholders to do so.
Now he’s wrecking the company seemingly on purpose. Market manipulation.
True. And we can’t legislate our way out of this. Any legislation we proffer and make happen will be weaponized against the poor.
I don’t think anyone told him he couldn’t buy it.
The board of Twitter is who sued to force the sale, since musk had kicked himself in.
That doesn’t mean his offer and subsequent behavior with the company isn’t market manipulation to be investigated, which is being done by the government.
Both things can be true. He stupidly kicked himself into a deal he was forced to complete, and his behavior since has indicated that he’s just gaming the market since he had to complete the deal.
Some countries make their penalties a percentage of income. Makes the sting equal for everyone.
My concern is that if you can drop tens of billions of dollars on a single acquisition, what’s to stop you from spending “just” one billion to manipulate the situation to put your target in a vulnerable situation?
Our entire society is set up to wring out anyone who is unfortunate enough to find themselves buying anything.
And as resources get squeezed, more and more people are trying to claw at smaller and smaller pieces of the overall economic pie.
The breaking point will be catastrophic.
Sometimes, and I don’t know if that’s possible here, it’s best to go after the current thing on its way out than to try to attack a brand new thing that is gaining influence.
Depends on how specific the scope is, and whether this will set precedent for future issues.
Correct. Most states’ laws do not envision the situation we are currently seeing, let alone what’s coming.
Check your state. What constitutes harassment, and can you think of harassing things that could be done without violating the law? I can for my state.