I don’t understand how any of this is addressing any of the concerns that users have expressed about the direction of the company. In fact, if I was feeling particularly skeptical, I’d just as well believe that these posts were solicited from inside the company.
- 0 Posts
- 8 Comments
doleo@lemmy.mlto
World News@lemmy.world•G20 photocall cancelled after Ed Miliband and other foreign ministers refuse to be pictured with Russia's Sergei LavrovEnglish
51·2 days agoEd is finally tough enuss
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Fuck Cars@lemmy.world•Man who ran over cyclist and dragged him under car for a mile convicted of murderEnglish
67·2 days agoRemoved by mod
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Privacy@lemmy.ml•Manifestos, Fear, and ‘Loser Thinking’: Inside Proton’s AI ReckoningEnglish
73·3 days agoMaybe I’m a particularly sensitive, spiteful snowflake, but if the boss of my company accused me of being a “loser” because I cared about the quality of the product, I’d be looking to deliberately sabotage the product. And for a new job, of course.
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Privacy@lemmy.ml•Manifestos, Fear, and ‘Loser Thinking’: Inside Proton’s AI ReckoningEnglish
24·3 days ago2026 business has got very little to do with customers/consumers, supply and demand. Maybe it’s been that way for a long time, but this ‘AI’ nonsense has bought it to the surface, evidently.
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Technology@lemmy.world•Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica caseEnglish
0·11 days agoYou’re technically correct, but I still disagree with you on this. My reasoning is that I think the real story here is that meta has wormed its way out of being punished adequately, again.
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Technology@lemmy.world•Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica caseEnglish
0·11 days agoNo, I mean more like “Meta to pay just 10% of original fine” - So people get an idea of how their judiciary system really works.
doleo@lemmy.mlto
Technology@lemmy.world•Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica caseEnglish
1·11 days agothe state was awarded $219.5 billion, but the penalty was ultimately reduced to $25 billion.
would have been a better headline, tbh
Why, though? What makes the person occupying the position of president uniquely qualified to make a decision in cases like this? If you have a judicial system that has been found to apply the law fairly, yet can still have its rulings overturned on a whim, doesn’t that make a mockery of the system?
It feels like an equivalent of a boss saying, “I know you and your team did months of research to come to the decision that you did, but I’m going to go in a different direction anyway. Not because I did more research than you, just because I feel like I know better than all of you”.
Unless theres’ some kind of reason that I’ve overlooked.
Beyond the scope of this thread, I know, but the concept of president seems absurd to me. Especially the way it’s implemented in the USA.