221–230 of 290 posts
“In October 2021, a jury awarded him $137 million in damages in the case, but a federal judge threw out that award as excessive. US District Judge William Orrick offered Diaz $15 million in damages in the case instead, but Diaz rejected the offer, choosing instead to have a new trial.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am in favor of free speech and people being in charge of their own companies. About half a century ago, after some difficult (and in some cases bloody) fights, the United States passed several laws curtailing some liberties a company owner may take with how they run their affairs with the aim of a net societal good. They are pretty well-constrained, place little burden on companies overall, and have the net effec…
That's your opinion as a probably left leaning person. Other people may think differently. That such laws were passed 50 years ago does not prove that they were a net positive.
...And you will be fought every step of the way, as the people who got the laws first passed were fought every step of the way. Of course, I hope you fail, as I've never heard an explanation of how repealing those laws would improve things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recommend doing one's own research on this topic; the well is quite deep. Musk's greatest talent is salesmanship; that sometimes divorces from the truth. This can get you started: https://news.sky.com/story/elon-musks-lies-about-tesla-on-tw...
Doesn't sound like such a clear cut case. Has the court decided yet?
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/elon-musk-twitter-te...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The inability to self-regulate your emotions in response to what other people say is a behavior that you're supposed to outgrow sometime in middle school.
Telling member of systemically opressed group that they should „self-regulate their emotions to what other people say” is something that only person who never experienced what systemic opression really is could say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a cult of personality created by 10+ years of fawning press coverage.
Its kind of funny to claim 10+ years of fawning press coverage when the reality was that electric cars and by extension Musk go ridiculed and called dangerous and unsafe in the media. The same goes for every little issue with SpaceX. Coverage of Musk has always been mixed and in main stream media often covered negatively. Maybe in the more techy press it was mostly positive. But even then, go threw history here on HN…
That's why he showed up alongside Tony Stark in Iron Man 2 and was treated like a god on an episode of Big Bang Theory.
The media, for the most part, treated him gently until the Thai cave incident when people started to catch onto the idea that this "quirky genius" might be an asshole.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't sound like such a clear cut case. Has the court decided yet?
That was just one search result. Again, I recommend doing one's own research. There's a lot to find. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/elon-musk-twitter-te...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's your opinion as a probably left leaning person. Other people may think differently. That such laws were passed 50 years ago does not prove that they were a net positive.
Totally agree. They're the law right now, and if you're looking to change that, there is a process to do so. I haven't heard any explanation of how removing them would improve America other than "it would take us back to how things were before, which was better," which is a non-starter. ...And you will be fought every step of the way, as the people who got the laws first passed were fought every step of the way. Of c…
More freedom also means more potential businesses who have to compete for workers, which is good for the workers. If businesses have to compete, they'll try to make things as nice as possible for the workers.
The argument that things would become what they "were before" doesn't make that much sense. In a poor economy, things are poorly, no matter what socialist laws try to prevent it (worker protection only helps you if you have a job, for example). There is no reason that by abandoning some law from the 50 years ago, the economy would fall back to the state of the 80ies. Also maybe the 80ies weren't actually so bad. I'm too lazy to look it up, but I keep hearing that in the old days, people could afford to buy houses and feed a family on a single salary.
I'm sure you can get better explanations and economic theories. You have never heard an explanation because you have never looked for it or listened to one, not because none exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Telling member of systemically opressed group that they should „self-regulate their emotions to what other people say” is something that only person who never experienced what systemic opression really is could say.
I'm a member of a systemically oppressed group. Try again.
[flagged]
Some people think racism is bad, and that doing bad things should have some kind of repercussions and that companies have responsibilities around what happens in the workplace. Shocking I know.