Given Trump’s track record for keeping contracts, let alone promises, I doubt he has a good track record with returning favors.

Umm … That AI generated hentai on the page of the same article, though … Do the editors have any self-awareness? Reminds me of the time an admin decided the best course of action to call out CSAM was to directly link to the source.

The image depicts mature women, not children.

I think it is called the network effect. People are still using Twitter because the messages they want to see are being posted there, and those messages are being posted there because that’s where the audience is. So, basically, people are locked in.

This also means that any loss in user count has a double effect, as not only users are lost, but the utility of the service for the remaining users decreases. So, what I’m saying is, if Elon continues this way, at some point there will be a large exodus of users from Twitter, as each loss of users reduces the utility of Twitter further, triggering a chain reaction.

Of course, we can’t know when that happens, and since we’re both on Lemmy, we’ve already self-selected as people with little tolerance for enshittification.

I’d probably take this suggestion, just to see where its going with this. (I know there’s no design behind these suggestions, but it’s funny).

How restrictive do you want to be with the accounts? If you’re too restrictive, there won’t be enough users. If you’re not restrictive enough, the data will be used for AI training.

"This world needs no savior,

just a headsman to cut her down".

“Erscheine!” (2008) By Eisregen, translated from German.

Funny is allowed. But if funny is not funny, then it is nothing. And they were not funny.

I’m sort of wondering how difficult it is to stage a convincing suicide vs a convincing accident, and I think the latter might be easier.

Possibly, though I’d wait until the scandal has blown over before killing the whistleblower. He did the most damage when he decided to reveal information, and with the Boeing plane related incidents, I doubt that the prosecution’s case would fall apart without him, so why should there be a rush with killing him?

Well, the problem I see with making a murder look like a suicide is that it can be automatically suspicious if the victim said something along the lines of “if I die it wasn’t suicide”. Probably even if there was video evidence of it being legit. Why not make the death look like an accident instead? I’ve never murdered somebody, but I don’t think making the death look like an accident is that much more difficult than making it look like a suicide.

The question is ‘cui bono’. I don’t think Boeing does at this point in time. The death makes it worse for them PR wise. So, my theory, it was Airbus or another Boeing competitor.

Thank you.

The overturning of Roe vs Wade, which was an almost 50 year old precedent, is an example of the supreme court acting in a partisan manner. Since the premise is that the current supreme court has never acted in a partisan manner, the counterexample refutes the premise. And if the premise of an argument is not true, then the argument doesn’t support the thesis. So, the guy you cited is also wrong.

Edit: Turns out the rebuttal you linked is a reply to a different, albeit identically worded post. And in this context, Shalafil didn’t use the term ‘never’ in their premise, meaning that in that context, a single counterexample actually isn’t enough to disprove the premise. So you’re right on this one. Sorta annoying that these two clash several times in this discussion.

How many appeals do they get currently? How many should they get? You said they typically don’t appeal because they are innocent, so what about the atypical cases where they are innocent?

How?

Afraid_of_zombies provided a counterexample to one of your theses, which you failed to debunk.

Most authoritarian regimes generate revenue that can be distributed among the people who keep the regime going. If you kill the dictator, you would have to take over the operations to keep the money flowing. However, if there’s a total breakdown of society, then the dictator has a big treasury, but no income. So the guards have a choice between either getting a small cut of the treasury each month, or killing the dictator/billionaire, and taking all of the treasury for themselves.

I feel like shooting fish in a barrel:

The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew.

That would just get them tortured. While torture is normally not a good way to get information, it’s different when the obtained intel can be immediately verified by trying the combination. The lock could be set up in such a way that it jams when you enter it wrong, but its unlikely that the torturers will just give up at this point. More likely, they’ll keep going in hope that you have a way to circumvent the lockdown.

Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival.

Thing is, there’d be two ways the collars can fail. They can go off when they shouldn’t, or fail to go off when they should. Both can be exploited by an attacker, and guarding against one makes the other more likely.

Time to start building guillotines, boys and girls.

That’s a good idea.

I suppose a non-compliant browser will need to be build if this comes to pass.