h14h

Best way to address this is to reword a bit:

I probably would ~~not use~~ avoid using an instance that wasn't federated to Threads

Using "not" twice in a single sentence is generally something worth avoiding IMO.

Anarchists develop structures and agreements that discourage concentration of power

MLMs believe that they must use the state, capitalism, and by extension coercive control

Are these not different words for the same fundamental concepts?

I fail to see how "the state" and "capitalism" aren't just a more developed form of "structures" and "agreements". And if the community decides punishment is an appropriate response to breaking an "agreement", how is that any different from "coercive control"?

And if you're community gets large enough (say even like a couple hundred people), how are any decisions gonna get made even remotely efficiently?

Feel like you're a hop skip and a jump from a representative democracy. And as soon as bartering becomes too inconvenient, I'm sure a new "agreement" still be made to use some proxy as a form of current and boom now you've got capitalism too.

IMO there are big risks consuming news & opinion from any single source.

Whether it's the CCP manipulating the TikTok algorithm, Russia buying ad space on Facebook, or American conglomerates pushing narratives on western mainstream media, there will be implicit biases everywhere.

The only real answer is to get news from multiple sources with diverging perspectives, try to find where facts overlap, challenge your own implicit biases, and form a perspective in line w/ your values.

Seeing America blame TikTok for pushing propaganda is the pot calling the kettle black -- and honestly more of a distraction than anything else.

The real important issue is that people are dying, and the existing power structures are doing jack shit to stop it.

Star Trek is the only reason I'm paying for Paramount+.

If Lower Decks and/or SNW go, I go.

This is a great suggestion -- I used balance a few years ago the last time they did one of these year free trials and thought it was great.

It was after that free year ran out that I found medito, which was a worthy substitute despite not being quite as personalized.

I'm really happy we secured the funding, but I really hope at least some of it goes towards building transit-oriented development around the new stations.

Many of the renders CTA have put out depict stations in lifeless neighborhoods that are mostly 4-lanr stroads and parking lots, which would really sap much of the potential value this project could provide.

If someone makes a dangerous product, it is reasonable to expect them to include appropriate safety features to reduce the risk their product poses to society.

The "victims" here aren't the automobile manufacturers, they're the people whose cars got stolen and those who were run over by a reckless joyrider or shot in a drive-by enabled by criminals having easy access to insecure, easy-to-steal vehicles. These are all people who wouldn't have befallen harm if these vehicles had standard anti-theft features.

The reason nobody's talking about suing bike manufacturers is because nobody was stealing bikes and riding around shooting people or crashing through the sides of buildings.

I think there is absolutely a legal argument that anti-theft features are critical safety features in cars, specifically. Not sure whether that argument will hold up in court, but it's not anywhere near as straightforward as "bike manufacturers don't have to care about theft, why should car manufacturers?"

Additionally...

Uyghurs when they're ~~detained~~ sent to a ~~concentration camp~~ free job training program:

Chuckles. I'm ~~in danger~~ immensely grateful to the glorious Chinese Communist party for graciously offering me this tremendous opportunity.

Why does a car manufacturer have to care about theft at all?

This argument doesn't make any sense to me. Why bother with keys and locks then? Is it more practical to expect society to eliminate literally all crime?

I'm sure there are good reasons to dislike this lawsuit, but this isn't one of them.

Completely agree on the notion of the community needing "good faith" over "kindness".

A discussion forum loses much of its value when even a modest percentage of its userbase isn't participating in a free exchange of ideas, but rather evangelising their favorite ideas or beliefs by abusing the tools provided by the forum in bad faith to promote or suppress ideas that respectively support or contradict their ideology.

It's one thing to present your contradictory/minority beliefs with supporting evidence to the forum in the hopes it stands on its own, and quite another to coordinate w/ others or create alt accounts to invade that forum and create an illusion of consensus through voting/commenting accordingly.

It doesn't matter whether the ideology is white supremacy, communism, or even something apolitical like preferring Linux over Windows -- astroturfing and bad faith interactions of any allegiance are toxic to a discussion forum.

Oof yeah was not aware of these at the time of my original comment.

LMG (Linus Media Group) was making careless mistakes and publishing a lot of inaccurate data, sometimes going as far to not recommend or label a product as "bad" after misusing it. This was likely due to an unnecessarily rushed pace of video releases that came from prioritizing sponsor revenue over accuracy, which many feel is a pretty massive ethics breach for a news outlet that is marketing itself as a home for highly objective, data driven content (LTT Labs).

Gamers Nexus called out this behavior in a 40 minute video which kicked off all the drama, and Linus posted a kneejerk response on the LTT forum where he largely defended his behavior and conclusions and badmouthed Gamers Nexus for going public with these criticisms instead of sharing them privately.

A few days later, LTT put out a video that was almost entirely LTT leaders other than Linus admitting how bad everything was, sharing some details on their processes, and committing to being more transparent & taking a week off uploading videos to rework things. But the video also included some tone deaf moments, like a plug for merch and Linus talking for a bit where he sort of apologized but didn't really talk for long enough to acknowledge all of his fuck ups. He did say "I'm sorry" at one point which was pretty meme worthy.

The video was also monetized when it went up and the description had links to their merch store in it, which people called out as slimy and LTT subsequently removed.

Different people have different conclusions -- some think it was a total non-apology, but I personally am satisfied. To me all their issues were the result of bad processes/automation run amok, so their commitment to reworking their processes and being more transparent about them with the community is exactly what I wanted to see.

But that's just me -- I think there are many valid conclusions that can be drawn from this.

Edit: There was also a reddit post on Reddit made by a former employee, Madison, that made allegations of sexual harassment. If true, these would be extremely damning, and to my knowledge LMG has not spoken on them yet. I also am just learning about this, so I don't know whether these statements have been corroborated by anyone.