I just don’t see any of this. I think he said and done so many horrible things. I think his only interest is in getting attention, regardless of what for, and regardless if his actions harm others and the US. It wouldn’t surprise me if at age 78 he has some medical problems and dementia, but I don’t see these subtle signs in the video.
I wish it said what the effective yield will be for bond purchases if they sell for the expected price. Is that yield consistent with other bonds with similar ratings?
It sounds right in content and in him not knowing that lay is a transitive verb.
The people in China, and to a lesser extent Russia, want to have a word with you about how the government can control the internet. It’s not happening year yet. I’m hopeful that people will just go around the censors to get the content they want. I’m concerned that when Tiktok shut off its service and some people wrongly thought the gov’t “blocked” the packets, many Americans were okay with that.
I use YouTube and don’t get much far-right content. My guess is it’s because I don’t watch much political content. I use a podcatcher and websites for that. If I watched political content, it might show me some lurid videos promoting politics I disagree with because that tends to keep viewers engaged with the site/app longer than if they just showed videos consistent with the ideology I seek out. That gives people the feeling they’re trying to push an ideology.
I made that up without any evidence. It’s just my guess. I’m a moderate libertarian who leans Democratic because Republicans have not even been pretending to care about liberty, and for whatever reason it doesn’t recommend the far-right crap to me.
That’s if we’re lucky and he doesn’t transform the US into a full blown dictatorship with president for life status.
I may be hitting the copium, but I feel like this will not happen. It feels like having influence over social media platforms is really powerful, but the Internet is still there. It’s easy to send or find information if you want to, much easier than before the Internet. It’s much easier for set up or use a new information outlet than it was to start a TV station or newspaper. I thought no retailers could beat Sears, until Walmart came. People protested Walmart saying if they don’t like your CD for political reasons, people just won’t buy it. No one can touch Walmart. Then came Amazon. I think social media platforms will be even more short-lived in their influence, especially considering how easy it is to “change the channel” or start a new “channel”.
I read some of it, but I find it funny because it should be a joke for the bar to be so ridiculously high for a new technology: understanding human history.
We need to find a way to teach people to sort out information, to put their immediate emotions on pause and search for information
This entire comment and @whoisearth@lemmy.ca’s comments are so powerful.
I think people have two modes of getting information: digging into a newspaper article and trying to figure out what’s going on and seeing a lurid headline in the tabloid rack. Most people do both ends of the spectrum and a lot of in-between. Modern technology lends itself to giving tabloid-like content while we’re waiting in line for a minute. This is why Tiktok is concerned about being removed from the app store, even though it’s easy to install the app yourself, easier than signing up for a newspaper delivery subscription was. But Tiktok isn’t more like a lurid tabloid that most people would not go two steps out of their way to find, but they might read it waiting in a slow line. I’m hopeful that people will learn to manage the new technology and not keep being influenced by tabloid entertainment.
On the other side of this, there is the Deep Space Nine episode In the Cards. Nog, a Ferengi, helps Jake do work in exchange for things that people want. Then take some risks, buying stuff they don’t know if they can sell, and end up makings some trades that gets people what they want, so Jake can get what he wants. In the end there’s a montage showing everyone ends up happier.
So people did work freely. People paid them freely. They took a risk with some of their gains to buy things they hoped might meet someone else’s needs, with the hope of making mutually beneficial change. In the end, people served one another freely, not based on guilt or coercion, and everyone ended up with more of what they wanted. That’s a world most people want to live in.
The horror of the Soviet Union are will soon pass beyond living memory too.
It feels like the Nazis are passing beyond living memory so there are few people alive who remember how bad they were.
The world is full of Steve Wozniaks who just never get a chance to shine because they are not interested in capital accumulation or are really eccentric or can’t take economic risks or just lost a cutthroat business competition because they trust or are kind.
I actually think the world economy runs on trust and kindness. If even one percent of agreements people make went to the courts, the economy could not function.
There are mozarts and einsteins toiling in fields right now.
I agree. Giving everyone opportunity is the right thing to do and it leads to increased prosperity. There’s no easy way to do it. It’s something difficult and worth trying to do.
We have an unnecessary zero-sum-game for an economy.
The economy has generated unbelievable amounts of wealth, not zero-sum at all, a huge increased sum.
Defending the right to unpopular and offensive speech is not the same as compromising with the speech. You can truly abhor what someone’s saying and not try to some them.
I actually think it would be closer to Atlas Shrugged, where the people generating new means of production begin to disappear and society becomes much poorer.
The US didn’t take action to block the app, Tiktok did. Maybe the government would have taken action eventually. It smells like a political plan, where someone at Tiktok agreed to block the app for 24 hours as a political favor.
Whether you think the person he killed deserved it or not is irrelevant, giving a free pass because of that sets an extremely dangerous precedent
It’s just patently absurd. It’s an angry mob. They probably didn’t even know the victim. They could turn on you, me, or each other.
I remember seeing a commemorative plate in a Star Trek magazine in the 80s, when I was kid. I asked my parents to buy me one. They asked what I wanted with a Star Trek plate. That was a good point. I still don’t know what I would have done with a commemorative plate.
I think it’s nonsense to think that when people freely trade money for goods, the person receiving the money “wins” and the person receiving the goods “loses”. They made the trade because it was good for both parties.
I’m American, and we’re pursing the opposite of what I think is good policy.