view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
So? No billionaires at all are better than both cases. Bezos is evil too, any investment going towards him is terrible to. It's better than Elon, but all this is terrible. Also, Bezos is not trying to preserve the status quo, he's only trying to protect himself and his pockets, that's all.
Nowhere did I claim that billionaires are good. I’m saying which type are the most dangerous.
It’s like saying “which tiger is more dangerous, the hungry one or the hungry AND rabid one?” Obviously both are existential problems to us, but one is still worse the others.
Of course, nor did I mean to imply you did so!
I do get your point, and, on the surface level, I agree. However, I think it's an inferior analysis of the situation.
Take your tiger metaphor; naturally, the rabid and hungry one is the most dangerous. Nevertheless, as you pointed out, they are both existential problems. I simply can't celebrate, be satisfied, or even be appeased by the knowledge that we're harbouring a hungry tiger, no matter what hungry and rabid tiger we may avoid by doing so. That's my point.
It does seem we're on the same page about this, to be honest... It's just that your initial reply seemed a little
how do I put it...
irrelevant? It's the Maxim of Quantity. We both agree that billionaires are fundamentally problematic, then why did you go and specify which ones are worse?
Yeah... I get that, but why would you even bring that up? Why say that? It doesn't imply that you're someone that pisses in cereal, but it does give off that feeling.
Yeah... I get that, but why would you even bring that up? Why say that? It doesn't imply that you're someone that thinks billionaires are good, but it does give off that feeling.
Do you pick up what I'm putting down?!
Yeah we’re on the same page. The original context was buying Kuiper internet instead of Starlink, so choosing the least bad option seemed relevant to me.