with about as much irrational hate as the people they despise, like Trump.

Thanks for outing yourself. Makes it easy to just skip the conversation and not bother trying to open up a conversation made in bad faith.

I’m heavily downvoted in this comment section because I dared ask a hypothetical philosophical question?

If you do it in a way that feels like you’re “just asking questions”, that’s a dishonest gesture often used in alt-right pipelines to astroturf discussions. sealioning is what it’s grown to be called.

If you were being genuine, I’m sorry you weren’t believed. But this is sadly an increasingly common internet tactic out there.

old school 80’s/90’s sci-fi humor. They’d often use some superpower or new tech with “x-ray vision” that can conveniently see through clothes but not skin…

I imagine the rest can be left to your imagination on how that humor was utilized.

I don’t hate tech. But we are definitely in time of techno robber barons who have long drained any benefit of the doubt. Meta especially deserves no grace.

There’s a clear disctinction these days bewteen “Tech” and “Big Tech™️”. This is firmly in the latter.

Are there alternatives outside of paging. I know the risk of texting sensitive information, but I figured there’d be a more modern system than paging.

at least you don’t become deadweight in the economy

In theory, yes.

Reality: we already have shit welfare programs and I doubt UBI will fix it. I also doubt we’ll even get to a point of UBI in my remaining career time. At least not without a lot of blood.

The present as is is pretty bad, I’d hope we can fix that before theorycrafting the future. economists 100 years prior theorycrafted 15 hour work weeks, and look how far we’ve come.

It’s more of a vent than a joke. “In private” with trusted friends. If this was something said out loud or even on a public tweet I’d get it. But this seems to fall closer to something like confiding in therapy than that.

Ofc, a trained therapist would understan this is a rant. The AI does not, and the FBI couldn’t care less about context.

22YO, so yeah. That was probably peak Snapchat age for them.

Wow. So Wikimedia is really just a small hedge fund that happens to run the servers for an encyclopedia on the side. I had a hunch they spent a lot more on other non-wikipedia stuff, but for hosting to cost almost 2% of what they invest is eye opening. And makes it all the more petty that they can’t pay their labor. Especially since so much labor is in fact volunteer work.

Curious, what does Wikimedia actually invest in besides Wikipedia? It’s still a non-profit, right?

they are a 3rd party and therefore not liable for the bullshit they spout.

Screw that liability BS so hard. You hire them to represent your company, you need to be accountable for what they do under your payroll.

I just hope the past generation (going on two now) have gotten people to see through the gaslighting and we can rise up against it this time.

only became a problem because Meta made them

Anyone who remember “glassholes” knows this isn’t new. Wearing a camera on your literal eyes is still a step too far in this otherwise compromised world.

But yes, I think the big issue here, as others pointed out, has to do with the nature of the company producing them. That’d be especially important for a place like DEFCON, which is all about securing your data.