461–470 of 512 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren’t you afraid of using a VPN and their being ramifications?
Using a common VPN on a residential IP caused my entire internet connection to be blocked for a few hours at a time after ~10 minutes, verified over a few weeks with ~3 intermittent attempts. Make of that what you will.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how everyone talks about their use of Meta products: "I don't use them except for those times I use them...". We all need to actually boycott and actively help create alternatives or these little bits of fabricated need will keep them in business forever.
I doubt my semi-monthly marketplace usage is contributing more than it costs. If everyone used just the bare minimum free feature set, the company would not be viable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
>Meta is not people, it's a publicly traded company that's practically legally required to make money and grow infinitely. Has a company ever faced any sort of legal repercussions for sacrificing profit for moral reasons? That isn't rhetorical. I'm not aware of this ever happening, so I'm dubious of your claim.
> My ambition is to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives and their homes. To do this we are putting the greatest share of our profits back in the business.
> A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end. The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of men to attain that end and does not extend to a change in the end itself, to the reduction of profits or to the nondistribution of profits among stockholders in order to devote them to other purposes.
It's clear time and again that having short-term growth at all costs means you can't have principles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If they did they would elect different leaders." Like who? Notable candidacies are predicated on million dollar budgets, and pretty much everyone who runs on justice and gets into an office in the US then neuters themselves. It's not a democratic state, and US society has very little tolerance for or understanding of democracy.
If your point is to suggest no alternatives have ever been contemplated then that is simply factually untrue and I think you know that. In some cases, such people succeed locally/statewide even if failing nationally. My point is simply you don't get to rob the electorate of its agency because you don't like the choice its made. That's about as silly as the grandparent to your comment citing random polls to establish…
What "agency"? Participation in US elections is junk level, politicians openly and routinely 'redistrict' and suppress voting, and the median US citizen is revulsed by the prospect of egalitarian organising.
The current US president is an Idi Amin style autocrat, and the "electorate" is responding by lulling around in the streets with one hand occupied by a live streaming spy device and then getting beaten by cops or cop adjacents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When some countries tell them 'You need to make sure the product is safe for children', or 'you can't let people under 16 on the platform' Meta stomps their feet, says it's impossible and/or bad for society and spends millions on campaigns to influence the public against the govt's position. In some cases going as far as threatening to leave the country. So yes, they absolutely have a choice.
Lobbying only works in a democracy, and the UAE is too rich to simply bribe.