this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
1195 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

69726 readers
4698 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

They are desperate to be cool, it's so cringe.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cuban_Pete@lemy.lol 3 points 1 hour ago
[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 10 points 2 hours ago

The saying money can't unlame you still true.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 hours ago

If they were posh people with "breeding" that wouldn't make being the direct or indirect victim of their destruction any better, unless you're an upper middle class Briton who has bern btought up with 19th century notions of "born to rule elites" such as most columnists for The Guardian.

I get it that people here derive a little enjoyment out of taking the piss of the character flaws of these wankers, but were they are coming from is not were this columnist is coming from.

[–] AidsKitty@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Every major politician in the USA has major financial backers with their own agendas that they purchase through superPAC contributions and by funding re-election campaigns. It's been the ruling oligarchy my whole life and I'm middle aged. Pretending it's different or worse now is disingenuous.

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 8 points 3 hours ago

He's such a fucking dork.

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 35 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t know if anyone else has noticed this but everything seems to be going down the tubes quite fast.

Yeah like having to accept all cookies to read the article.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 hours ago

Block third-party scripts, no cookie popup.

[–] Cocopanda@futurology.today 31 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I will be happy if Zuck is Luigi’d before my death. Also Musk and Bozo.

[–] elrecoal19_1@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

I hope you aren't from the US because that's surely gonna put you on a NSA list

[–] FragrantGarden 3 points 1 hour ago

NSA take note, we can Luigi you too. Sit back and let the oppressors perish and it will stop with them.

[–] muusemuuse@lemm.ee 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I wouldn't worry about the list. We are all on it by now anyway.

[–] elrecoal19_1@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I'm not from the US and didn't plan to visit anytime soon anymore so I don't mind, just reminding others.

[–] SaladKing@lemm.ee 27 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

No one seems to have read Machiavelli’s stuff these days. It explains so much. Also, just history in general will tell you all about today’s happenings.

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

The Prince was a warning of what could happen. The Drumpf is the result of ignoring the warnings.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 47 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Imagine if, when Facebook rolled out, people were just like "no thanks, I'm good" and it never took off.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 19 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

That's exactly what happens when a Facebook competitor (possibly an ethical one) rolls out these days. Which is part of the problem. Zuck poisoned the idea.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 15 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Friendica exists, and it's part of the Fediverse. It's not going anywhere.

[–] dwindling7373@feddit.it 1 points 2 hours ago

Dead things can't, in fact, go anywhere.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 21 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

I wanted to. I liked Myspace. It has character. Some of it was cringe. But you could at least customize it. Facebook seemed so bland. But I had an ex GF that insisted on it and I didn't think it was worth breaking up over. I shouldn't have been such a pushover.

[–] AllOutOfBubbleGum@lemmy.world 10 points 9 hours ago

I stayed on Myspace long past when the majority jumped ship. It eventually lost what made it special when the boy band guy bought it to twist it into something more music focused. But I still preferred it to the sterile, uniformity of Facebook.

[–] asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev 9 points 10 hours ago (4 children)

You would break up over switching online platforms?

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

Nothing like that. It was more like she was insistent and I didn't feel like it was a hill to die on at the time.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 8 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

It sounds ridiculous now with everything that's happened in social media in the meantime, but I can see that being a thing in 2006 when the vibe of social media was very different to what it's become now. Back then it was just a tidy little PHP site for you to chat and share photos with friends and family on. Literally nothing appeared in your feed that wasn't a post from a Friend. It was basically a Whatsapp group with a photo gallery feature.

Since Facebook didn't have the baggage it has now, it's much easier to read refusing to join your girlfriend's circle of friends and family back then as a wider rejection of her as a person, same as if you refused to join her family Whatsapp/Telegram/whatever group chat.

I'm not taking her side here, but I wanted to give a bit of perspective for people looking at it through the lens of 2025.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 9 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm assuming the GF would break up with OP over it. Which is itself a big red flag.

Edit: fwiw, it does seem like there is quite a bit of drama and bullshit over choice of phone (Android vs Apple)

[–] slampisko@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

I used to hate the Android vs Apple drama vis à vis romantic partner choice, but then I realized that it's in itself a great filter of people I don't want in my life

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I remember LiveJournal as something good. I wouldn't use it, but felt a bit like Telegram today, except without Telegram, which is a good thing.

[–] chramies00@europe.pub 4 points 7 hours ago

It was, until the events of the mid-2010s when most of the science fiction fandom community quit it and went over to Facebook, presumably because that was more convenient (i.e. on it already) than going to e.g. Dreamwidth (a LJ-alike that is still going). It operated in a very similar way to FB but somehow much more focussed maybe because it never got the 'businesses having pages on there' bit. Those of my friends who were on both, often used FB more as an events calendar than all-around social media.

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 169 points 15 hours ago (11 children)

The thing they all share is that they are deeply unloved. Trump, musk, bezos, zuck, none of them have healthy loving families. They have noons they can genuinely connect with. And they all think by having more money and being more popular will fulfill that human need. But it never does, so they just keep going not realizing the path they chose doesn't end anywhere near what they desire. Money will never buy love and peace.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 20 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That's a tired stereotype. Powerful people are unloved because they don't need to be loved. They are psychopaths, they have all the love they need, they are bored with the world and have nothing more to want.

People around you are unloved because they have problems.

Also money can buy you a cottage surrounded by nice trees near a river, healthy food, more house animals than you could want, a fast PC, jasmine and lilac bushes outside your window.

I think it can go a long way.

My irritation from this stereotype is because it kinda says the opposite of what it says. It feels like sublimated envy, expressed by saying that you don't envy them. Why talk about their money at all then.

I wouldn't envy anyone's money if that's all the difference between us, unfortunately money buys power and power is used to impose one's will upon me, and that I very much care about.

But your typical young Trotskyists in the Interwebs write whole articles consisting of Marxist vibes (a strong thing, especially in spring, but not enough) and envy to those having more. LOL, someone having more money is not our problem. Our problem is someone attacking us with it.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 4 points 4 hours ago

While this is a fresh perspective of the trope, there is very significant evidence that becoming rich is a predictor of early death and depression, presumably due to how hard it becomes to connect to people. Normal people need money to eat and live, and handle it like the privilege it is. It is synonymous with survival for most people. It's no wonder at all to me why the oligarchs has been naturally selected to be psychopaths. All other people die. A select few give it away and devote themselves to reintegrate back to humanity but those are very few and far between.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 95 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

And they all think by having more money and being more popular will fulfill that human need.

If that was all it was, then I'd feel sorry for them. No, they're trying to fulfill that need by being Great Men of History with Mighty Plans, but their Mighty Plans are all terrible, because they're horrible people.

[–] o1011o@lemmy.world 38 points 14 hours ago (4 children)

Yeah, I think it's a mistake to imagine that these are good people who just need a little love. There are literally hundreds of millions of people who aren't getting enough love for proper human flourishing and it's not like that turned them all into fascists. The kind of evil exhibited by these people must be attributed to a fundamental enjoyment of the suffering of others.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 10 points 11 hours ago

No amount of money and power will ever scratch their itch

[–] overload@sopuli.xyz 17 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I wouldn't challenge this view for Musk, Bezos, Trump. But Zuck gives me more of a "reformed (now married) incel that comes from an otherwise normal family environment vibe". His marriage seems at least typical, likely loving etc.

His product happens to be the most harmful for democracy and I consider him equal for worst of the bunch as a result, but I think it's explained by corporate/personal greed and being out of touch with reality.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 hours ago

He wants to be Augustus Caesar. That’s not “normal loving relationship” behavior.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

not realizing the path they chose doesn't end anywhere near what they desire

It'll end where they deserve though. Alone, despised and empty. No amount of money or stupid blue checkmarks will ever change that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Tournesol@feddit.fr 69 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I have been prepared for evil, for greed, for cruelty, for injustice – but I did not anticipate that the people in power would also be such huge losers.

This. This is what I feel like

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 84 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

I just started reading this book about Facebook and I am amazed how little they cared about how much power they had, and how oblivious they were of it.

These are companies that rule the world, but don't know what they want with it, other than for it to generate profit

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 49 points 16 hours ago (7 children)

Musk, Zuckerberg and Bezos-- you can tell they are insecure. They became rich and powerful and now want to stomp on people.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Docker@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Great to find a like minded tribe. How about getting decentralised ?

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 3 points 9 hours ago

Why was Altman missing in the story? The next ruler of the world....

[–] hansolo@lemm.ee 81 points 18 hours ago (9 children)

Because it's so much better when they're charismatic assholes?

[–] jlow@discuss.tchncs.de 175 points 18 hours ago (5 children)

I think it's much sadder (more sad? saddest) that people fall for such absurd douche bags. If they would at least be sexy and seem smart you could understand how people could be fooled but this is just too hard to watch.

[–] frickineh@lemmy.world 77 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Yeah like, they have negative charisma, so it's extra baffling. I cannot imagine a world in which I'd support Donald Trump, but definitely not in this one where he routinely shits his own diaper. If he was only disgusting mentally but was a good speaker or handsome or whatever, it would make at least a little more sense

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›