Yes, there are certainly many who are just inherently evil, but I don’t think that’s the majority. I think most of them are like Eichmann: objectively speaking, of course, they are also evil, but they don’t get satisfaction from their cruelty. They simply don’t question what they’re told because it’s their job - and that’s enough of an excuse for them towards others and also towards themselves. Doesn’t make them any less guilty, though, I would say.

If I were to carry out this order, I would refuse. Who cares whether she’s “legal” or not - deporting a sick child is simply inhumane. Those goddam monsters!

But yes, that’s quite right. The reign of terror in Hitler’s Third Reich was also only possible with those who carried out orders and clung to the idea that they were not responsible. Hannah Arendt described all this very well in “The Banality of Evil”.

Is the lifespan of cats in this scenario 1,000 years or 9 x 1,000 years because of their nine lives?

Because the advertising business is highly centralized. Getting sponsorships is not as easy as you think.

An example: YouTube pays content producers per click, so to speak, a ridiculously small amount, but in total, with billions of clicks, a crazy amount. The money to finance this comes largely from advertising revenue (also Google’s main business model). They are the Gatekeepers so to speak.

But the content producers can’t live off this because Google keeps most of it for itself. They do give people the opportunity to find sponsors themselves tho - and that’s how people actually make the most money. But you have to find them for yourself or through intermediaries (that’s an industry in itself). This is only realistic if you have sufficient reach (subscribers in the example). And that, in turn, is only possible if you have already invested hundreds of hours in the production of content (you can’t make a living if you don’t get paid for that).

So I think it would be best if the platforms themselves were powerful enough in terms of reach to be able to negotiate well with advertisers. But not as powerful as Google, for example, who can afford to pay content producers a pittance because - unlike small platforms - they are not dependent on them.

I think we should be realistic. Content costs money because it requires a lot of effort. It’s naïve to think that content would just be created because people feel like posting something. If the Fediverse is to compete with companies like meta, this is only possible if there are opportunities for content creators to earn money. That should be self-evident, but it obviously isn’t here.

I’m not saying it’s necessary, but it is if the Fediverse is to have mainstream appeal.

Simply because the absolute majority of people are out and about where everyone is. And that’s where the content is. That’s the point: if you want good content, it costs money. It’s not just corporations that make a living from it.

What I want to say is this: The Fediverse could provide fairer conditions for the people who produce content. That makes sense and is necessary because the Internet lives from that.

I just don’t understand why people here don’t want to realize that work has to be paid for. That’s really strange.

MF DOOM - Lofi Villain

I’m from Germany. I subscribe to a decent weekly newspaper (“die Zeit”) and follow German news sites. I try to stay away from news on social media, but that’s hardly possible.

On Lemmy, I’ve mainly blocked keywords and names relating to US politics because the ridiculous bullshit from the White House is unbearable. Despite this, my feed is still full of the stupid drivel from Trump & Co. This is not news, but at best political soap opera entertainment far removed from reality.

Because this stupid stuff potentially affects me too, of course, I have subscribed to a decent monthly newspaper with an international focus (“Le Monde diplomatique”). I can’t stand US politics in particular any other way.

Thanks again, I’ll give it a try.

Indeed, fear no more, thy can live in peace now as the beast lies slain by the mighty gaze of a hero.

Thank you. It may be a small victory, but an important one.

I see, a kind of Clarence Thomas type of thing.

I’m not from the US: What happened to Katie Britt, who gave her response to Biden’s State of the Union address from her kitchen? Is she happy now? I mean, not that I wanted to criticize anyone, but that was totally obvious even before the election.

That sounds as if Musk could soon make an offer to take over the company. Then probably also an out-of-court settlement worth some millions so that he can call himself co-founder as usual. Finally, he could speed off into the sunset on a goddamn cyberbike - hopefully never to be seen again.

Ye, the US should consider the same in light of current events. If the totally incorruptible Supreme Court continues to insist that the president is a god-king who is above the law, appropriate measures should be considered if at least a semblance of democracy is to be preserved.

Indeed, and it is frightening how persistent they are. I have blocked pretty much all their names and various connected terms by now, but my Lemmy feed still consists to a large extent of the nonsense and misinformation that these trolls spread on a daily basis to distract from their criminal activities.

I can only imagine how much worse it must be on the mainstream platforms.

There is simply no escaping the bullshit that spills out of the white house all over the world. Unfortunately, even less so because the local Nazis and the conservatives in my home country have long been using the same troll strategies that they have adopted from the US since they have proven effective in Europe as well.

The continuous noise of these trolls really has nothing to do with politics or news. On the contrary, it’s just vicious anti-politics and deliberate misinformation.

Yes, these compount words might be the reason why we couldn’t get rid of the damn Nazis for good: After the Second World War, we Germans ourselves probably didn’t understand what the purpose of the “Entnazifizierungsbehörde” (authority to combat National Socialist ideology) was and, accordingly, could not really grasp why it was so important. A serious mistake that still has consequences to this day, unfortunately…

/s, obviously

I think Thomas, like many other influential people, knows very well that he doesn’t have to fear any consequences or even prosecution in this system, which this decision now confirms once again. That was to be expected, because why should anything have changed. I mean, Thomas was already obviously corrupt way back in 2000, when he was already a supereme court justice and, together with his cronies, prevented the recount of the votes in Florida, which meant that Bush became president instead of Gore. Incidentally, his billionaire buddy Harlan Crow was also already involved back then. So he has been doing this for more than 25 years in such a brazen manner and has simply remained true to himself - and only to himself.

Yes, but what most people think is not represented properly on mainstream social media, unfortunately.