Angenehm unaufgeregter, sachlicher Beitrag, aber das wird die breite Öffentlilchkeit leider herzlich wenig interessieren. 20 Jahre Reformstau und dann 4 Jahre Allnighter-Stress, um das Ruder grade noch rumzureißen, ist einfach der Modus Operandi der deutschen Demokratie. Dass das langfristig kein gutes Modell ist, wird man so richtig erst merken, falls die Autoindustrie in den nächsten Jahren abbaut. Denn wie Börsianer wissen: Im Bullenmarkt kann jeder Gewinne machen. Wenn es hierzulande also nicht mehr aufwärts geht, dann werden genau die Konfliktlinien, die man so lange wegignoriert hat - alt-jung, reich-arm, Arbeit-Kapital, alteingesessen-zugezogen -, zu Bruchstellen werden.
Moment. Welche sozialdemokratischen Parteien hatten wir noch so in Deutschland? USPD? Ne, die hat keine Kompromisse mit Rechten gemacht. Die PDS und die Linke, wenn wir wohlwollend in der Auslegung sind - haben das auch nicht gemacht. Wer kommt denn sonst noch in Frage? Eigentlich nur die SPD selber.
Der ist da wo der Arbeitnehmerflügel der Union ist (der besteht gefühlt auch nur noch aus Radtke und der ist einmal im Jahr in den Medien), im Abseits:
Gerade hat Sachsens Ministerpräsident Michael Kretschmer in einem RND-Interview ziemlich unverblümt verlangt, dass alle Beschäftigten jede Woche eine Stunde länger arbeiten. Daraufhin platzte Radtke mal wieder der Kragen: “Eine Stunde weniger Interviews pro Woche wären vielleicht auch nicht schlecht”, ätzte er. “Angesichts von 1,3 Milliarden Überstunden im letzten Jahr, davon 700 Millionen unbezahlt” seien die Ratschläge seines Parteifreundes Kretschmer doch “sehr schräg”.
Es ist nur eine kleine Episode. Aber sie steht für ein größeres Problem: Der Arbeitnehmerflügel der Union fühlt sich und seine Positionen nicht ausreichend ernst genommen. Und er glaubt, dass das der CDU insgesamt schadet - besonders in der Auseinandersetzung mit der AfD.
As much as I hate meta/Facebook, don’t get me wrong, I don’t think these laws are right either. I don’t think you should have to pay to simply provide a link to another website. This runs antithetical to the whole idea and structure of the internet. If they’re taking the article or photos and republishing it on their own website that’s different and they obviously should have to pay for that. The linking to news sites is actually good for news sites though and increases profit for publishers by driving traffic to their sites, it doesn’t take profit away. The news publishers are free to have a paywall or put advertisements on the page being linked too and get revenue from that. This feels like publishers wanting to eat their cake and keep it too, they want big search engines and social media to link to their articles so the news sites get traffic and revenue from advertisements/subscriptions, and then they also want the search engines who created that traffic in the first place to pay for linking too? I think publishers are shooting themselves in the foot in the long run lobbying for these laws all for a pittance of cash.
This idea could also affect things like lemmy too eventually and make them impossible, if you need to pay to simply provide a link to a news story or other website.
This right here. It’s an extremely bad and extremely problematic precedent. Linking to other sites is a fundamental part of the web. If you have to pay to link to a site, then the web is broken.
If you as a site feel you should be paid, then charge the people coming through the link, not the people providing the link to you.
It’s not something new that is spreading, it has been the case for over a century. We have always been ruled by corrupted politicians, they always lies during elections and then push for authoritarian measures that benefits the elites. People seem to realize this only when the party they don’t like gets elected, “left” and “right” is a trick to keep these two up in power in a cycle. This Meloni scum is nothing new, they are a puppet of people who have been ruling the country since 1945. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconien.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licio_Gelli
Saying that ALL politicians between the 1920s to the 2010s in Italy is wrong. You can search about De Gasperi, Berlinguer, Giolitti (I know, different eras) and others. I’m not saying everything they did was right, but they not all politicians are as bad as your comment is depicting.
This attitude of “all politics and politicians are equally dirty” is straight out of the russian propaganda playbook. This is the narrative they’ve pushed in my country for decades, and it’s chillingly effective. It closely resembles whataboutism, whenever you criticize a politician, people yell “AS IF THE OTHER SIDE IS BETTER.”
Why push this narrative, you ask? So that people become so disillusioned and apathetic that they don’t vote, so it takes less votes for Russia to get the parties it wants into power. It also breeds internal dissent, malcontent, instability, leads to low voter turnout.
Russia also pushes a version of this at home, and in allies like Belarus. The gist being, all politics is dirty and corrupt, don’t get involved, don’t vote, nothing matters, it doesn’t concern you.
So yeah, sorry about the rant, but when i see variations of that quote “if your vote mattered, they’d make it illegal”, i get really annoyed. If your vote mattered, they’d make you think it doesn’t so you don’t vote.
Sound like you are being brainwashed to stupidity, the thread is about Italy not Russia. Since you seem obsessed with it i suggest you to read Bakunin thoughts on Mazzini.
Well, that’s exactly the idea behind state’s propaganda.
Anyways, I keep my opinion that not all politicians are bad, in my case I only know well about Italy and the US.
Also, the discussion made from the other user references to the Russian history, but the argument is the same, so I don’t understand what the problem is, being the thread about the same concept.
Not bad as in “ovverral good” or not bad as “never wrong”?
Anyways I’d say Marco Pannella and Mattarella. (not always good, but overall not that bad)
The US president in the 20 years are either racists, kill children’s with drones or they lie and starts war in Iraq, so no I don’t want to select any US politician for the role of “not bad”.
At the very start, i point out that this worldview of all politics and politicians are dirty and corrupt is being pushed by Russia in many countries. I didn’t think i need to mention that i’m including Italy.
Just because Russia has a vested interest in distrust in the enemy’s government, it does not mean that said government is good or to be trusted either. Either side can be bad, and the enemy of my enemy is not automatically my friend.
I can criticize Russia’s invasion, cruelty, bigotry and ultra-right government while at the same time also criticizing the Ukrainian government banning unions and socialist organizations, re-criminalizing gay marriage, using illegal inhumane weapons, and so on. You don’t have to pick one of the two warring governments to uncritically support.
If Russia only used lies in their foreign meddling, they would not be particularly effective meddlers.
I made absolutely no mention of Ukraine and i would have written this comment with no changes ( and i probably have ) years before the invasion. It’s a strawman on your part to assume i uncritically support Ukraine ( or the US or EU for that matter ), just because i’m criticizing Russia. And if anything, i feel like we echo the same sentiment in both our comments, that just by criticizing one side doesn’t mean that the other doesn’t have flaws.
There may have been some politicians better than other but there’s not such thing as a good mafioso. Whoever wish to sit on the throne and rule with power on others is scum. We are all humans living in the same world, nations are invisible lines arbitrarily draw on a map.
Well, he also devided il Sud and il Nord. But this isn’t the discussion.
It’s about “not everything politicians make is bad”. I know that this is usually an argument made by people that sympatieyz Mussolini (“però i treni arrivavano in orario” - any far-right sympatizer), but I think that in some cases it’s actually not a bad argument (for example, Giolitti and MAYBE but maybe Berlusconi).
Running a social media company is not at all like running a normal tech company. It's one part technology, but it's one part psychology. He doesn't understand the psychology part whatsoever. He doesn't understand stand why people choose to engage or not engage with a community. He doesn't understand how and why Twitter became part an important news and information source and all of decisions he's made so far have reduced the relevance of the product.
Twitter verified status is there to help people trust Twitter, not just the person behind the checkmark. Now nobody trust your product. It also doesn't take a genius to understand that limiting access to your product makes people use it less.
Doesn't he have a condition that keeps him from understanding social norms? Wouldn't that alone disqualify him from making decisions about a social media company/site?
Elon has publicly claimed to have Asperger's (or, as it's known by the modern DSM, "ASD Level 1").
While I don't know if that's a self-diagnosis or the truth, I also have ASD Level 1 so I can somewhat understand his thought process... sometimes.
The fact that the platform makes the community isn't necessarily something I'd consider at first, and I don't think Elon considered it either. I really do think Elon was mad about how much people on the internet disliked him, so he made an impulsive bid to kick 'em out and tried to buy the whole platform. At some point someone talked some sense into him and he tried to back out, only to realize he was trapped in the deal and couldn't back out.
So the only thing he could really do at that point is double down. Kick the people off the site that he wanted gone. Find a way to kick out the bots that were clearly irritating him. Unban people who he thought were unjustly banned. There are easy and simple solutions to all of those things, and although they aren't popularthat's sort of the problem with ASD Level 1:
Failure to make eye contact or read social cues properly
Challenges in establishing or maintaining conversations
...
Apprehensive behavior
...
Trouble shifting focus
Expand that behavior up to a community of millions of people and you can start to understand Musk's behavior. It's fundamentally a community, with social norms and mores that aren't immediately obvious to those with ASD Level 1 (myself included). ASD makes it hard to have a grasp on why a community is there, and if you're a megalomaniac on top of that I can see how it'd be very easy to just say "Eh, I'll change it to work for me" without care for how it affects everyone else that uses it.
So you have him just making all these dumb-looking changes because understanding and empathy isn't his strong suit. He just does what he thinks will fix "the problem" and assumes that users are a given.
Yeah but Elons problem isn't just the ASD - that's part of it sure, but his problem is having ASD and a mother who told him repeatedly from a very very early age, that he was a genius.
That would be damaging to a neurotypical persons self view, but I dread to think how that damages a neurodivergent 😲
In short, Elon definitely displays narcissistic tendencies - and I suspect that being constantly told you are a genius who will change the world, is a bug reason why.
The fact that the platform makes the community isn’t necessarily something I’d consider at first, and I don’t think Elon considered it either.
Small correction, it’s actually the community that makes the platform. The community exists regardless of platform, the platform is there to help the community connect. The platform can help make new communities by facilitating connections but the platform needs communities to exist. People will form communities tailored to their interests without the internet all day, they’ve done it for millenia. If the platform makes it difficult for communities to connect, then the community will just go elsewhere.
The fact that he's trying to find a "cure" for ASD (using the most extreme methods) makes me think he's a self-loathing autistic and a turncoat who deserves no praise from others with ASD. I certainly don't respect him.
I didn't know I had ASD until I was an adult. Growing up I just knew I was weird and different and strange and nobody liked me. I didn't know why, I just knew I was doing something wrong and I simply wasn't "normal".
I would have given literally anything to be neurotypical, for a very long time.
When I was 19, I got formally diagnosed. For a few years after I was still hoping that it would somehow be "cured" and one day I could be like everyone else. I dunno if that made me a turncoat; just someone who didn't accept who I am.
I've since come to terms with it and accepted that it's an intrinsic part of me and that I wouldn't be the same person if I didn't have ASD. Like I can imagine what my life would be like without depression; I can't even think about what my life would be if I was neurotypical. I'd be so completely different that I basically wouldn't be "me" anymore.
But I only got to that level of acceptance because life worked out for me; I learned how to effectively mask, I have a good-paying stable job in my dream field (AAA game development), a significant other, and even a couple friends.
From what I can tell, Elon may have money but he's miserable. I can see a world in which he blames ASD for his misery (like I once did), and I can see how wanting to "cure" it makes him think that maybe he'd be happier. That's probably why he's killing monkeys with brain chips.
"Wie viele Weihnachtsfeste wird es noch brauchen, bis die Konservativen begreifen, was das bewirkt?"
Diese Konservativen wissen ganz genau, was das bewirkt. Es bewirkt Hass, Spaltung und Verdummung der Bürger und bringt ihnen damit Stimmen. Gut, es bringt auch noch Rechts-Radikaleren mehr Stimmen. Aber das ist halt ein kleiner Preis, wenn man dafür ohne Inhalte oder Lösungen zu haben trotzdem Macht erhält. Mit den Extremisten wird man später schon fertig, was soll denn da schiefgehen?
Abweisendes Gesicht und Handhaltung: Medizinisches Mittel kaufen dürfen um sich selbst einen würdevollen Tod zu ermöglichen Zustimmendes Gesicht, einladende Handhaltung: Flüchtende Menschen elendig auf dem Meer verrecken lassen
On one hand it is a shame to remove alternatives to YouTube. Odysee had RSS feeds and I never had much trouble with the player. On the other hand I never understood why they tried to tie it into the blockchain or cryptocurrency. I didn’t understand how that helped either users or the creators.
Peertube has RSS. I hope this pushes folks to Peertube. I personally recommend and love TILVids. You can set up an account on TILVIDs and even follow folks on other instances. Or spin up your own Peertube if you’re brave enough, I could never figure it out but I plan on trying again some day. :D aNot that I want the alt-right stuff, but if they go on their own server everywhere else just DeFederates them and I never have to see it.
But yeah, LBRY was all in on the Crypto BS. Honestly kind of hoping this is just the tip of the iceberg for the crypto companies playing in the arena.
I personally like Peertube but strongly dislike TILVids. They use Peertube but disable the federation bit. If it is the case that you can follow folks on other instances, it is even more unfair, because they block me from subscribing to content on their platform. Well, it isn’t worse than some other video platforms, but it’s certainly only taking, not sharing like we’re used on the fediverse. I’d use another instance and i recommend everyone else to do so, too. (…As long as this is an alternative. Feel free to use TILVids, it’s certainly better than Odysee or YouTube!)
I actually talked to the admin of TILVids about this. And he realizes the double standard, you can still access things from RSS, but he’s worked hard to get YT content creators to come over and the biggest concern those folks had was protecting their content. So he did turn off Federation to assuage those fears. He does push folks to spin up their own instances when they get big enough and even helps them with that if needed. He doesn’t want TILVids to be a silo either. I definitely understand the feeling and even had to think through that as well.
Thank you for the balanced view. I hope some day we ‘free’ people will stick together and replace that fear with trust in each other (and good moderation tools to ensure it). I’d love to hear those exact ‘fears’ and see if they’re warranted or artificial and this is just the excuse for protectionism. Because I myself am afraid that some of the free ‘alternative’ communities aren’t big and stable enough to bear additional stress and being split up in several fractions. It feels the same with the latest split and defederation happening in/on lemmy with beehaw separating from instances like lemmy.world. That caused quite some confusion with new users and trouble for everyone. I don’t think this is healthy for the platform as a whole. And splitting up any federated platform unnecessarily, will inevitably harm the platform as a whole.
This being said, tilvids must have made some exellent choices, too. They attracted quite an amount of high quality content and seem to be generally thriving. I have to give them that… :-)
Sites like this are a non-starter for me until and unless they make seeding whitelist only, so I have control over what I seed like I would with regular torrents. Because otherwise random users can and will end up unknowingly participating in the hosting of child abuse materials, nazi propaganda, and so on. I think this alone makes it nonviable as a youtube alternative at scale.
I’ll take youtube’s privacy violations over that any day.
On the other hand I never understood why they tried to tie it into the blockchain or cryptocurrency.
What’s so hard to understand about that? EVERY damn problem with the modern Internet goes back to money. People producing content like to be paid. People running the servers like to be paid. And if you don’t want to people flooded with ads, you need to get money from somewhere else. Credit card fees make it impossible to pay small creators, so you need to have a micro-payment layer in between, cryptocurrency provides just that.
Und weiter geht der wilde Ritt weiter nach rechts!
Flüchtlinge mit Flugzeug als sichere und (für Asylsuchende) günstige Alternative zu uns lassen: EU-Richtlinie 2001/51/G regelt. Wäre ja auch sinnvoll, sie an eine überschaubare und punktuelle Anzahl an Orten aufzunehmen und weiter zu verteilen.
Flüchtlinge wenigstens mit dem Boot sicher über das Meer bringen lassen? Nee, lass mal lieber via Resolution Boote zerstören, damit Schlepper noch unsichere und löchrigere Boote nutzen. Und der Rest: Frontex macht das schon! Ist zwar illegal aber können wir nichts machen.
Wenigstens Seenotretter erlauben ein Minimum an humanitäre Hilfe zu leisten? Nancy Faser: hold my beer!
I really don’t understand it. I don’t think I’ve ever seen an article content in Facebook, it’s usually just a link. And why would having a link to the actual website be something to pay for? Because people don’t read articles anymore and only the title? If so, that’s not Meta’s or Google’s fault…
Google absolutely uses article texts. If you search on Google, you’ll see the “People also ask” section which might paraphrase your question, and then use sections of direct text from articles to answer your question.
Facebook often has article summaries as well, but I’m unsure whether those are posted by the organization itself or by Facebook.
Its a stupid as hell law, but I think the not having news on Facebook could be good? Since anything posted is basically all outrage baiting anyways, this would be reducing that and forcing people to leave their circle jerks/echo chambers for actual news.
Though people will probably just fuck it up more and start quoting hearsay without even nothing to find an article…
archive.is
Top