Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
496 196 1.8k
  • 11 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    128 Aufrufe
    jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.worldJ
    No, re-read. It is about technology.
  • Delivering BlogOnLemmy worldwide in record speeds

    Technology technology
    3
    28 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    27 Aufrufe
    kernelle@0d.gsK
    Nice to hear! I'm glad you enjoyed it.
  • AI Pressure from the Top: CEOs Urge Workers to Adapt

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 138 Stimmen
    28 Beiträge
    124 Aufrufe
    1
    Not our. i talk, and you talk. it is our discussion. It’s a discussion you are trying to have i am not trying to have, i am having it. here you are, replying to me. why are you trying so hard to prove that a discussion is not a discussion? it does not make sense. I labeled as a layman’s guess. yeah. and since i am more knowledgeable than you in this particular regard, i contributed some information you might not have had. now you do and your future layman's guess can be more educated. that is how the discussion works. and for some strange reason, you seem to be pissed about it.
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Pimax: one more brand exposed for promoting "positive reviews".

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    55 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    27 Aufrufe
    moose@moose.bestM
    This doesn't really surprise me, I've gotten weird vibes from Pimax for years. Not so much to do with their hardware, but how their sales / promo team operates. A while back at my old workplace we randomly got contacted by Pimax trying to have us carry their headset, which was weird since we didn't sell VR stuff or computers even, just other electronics. It was a very out of place request which we basically said we wouldn't consider it until we can verify the quality of the headset, after which they never replied.
  • 462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    345 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.