haverholm

And in your understanding, Google are somehow superheroes swooping in from on high by ... putting the thumbscrews on a union website?

I get you have an undefined grudge against publishers, but you're kind of off the mark here.

Hardly. The lesser evil perhaps, but in any context that includes Google there's never a doubt who's actually the bigger culprit.

Picard agrees.

I've been thinking the same thing. The first season felt a little like a patchwork of different visions.

I'm glad for what we got, I'm one of the people who actually liked Disco from the beginning. It would be interesting to hear his roadmap in more detail, though.

Given how much fediverse users have actively campaigned for instances to defederate from Threads, this martyr posturing tells me a lot about Minds.

Besides, they're still free to talk, doesn't mean others have to listen.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. As may be apparent I have spent some time on the microblogging side of the fediverse, where people tend to take less kindly to their content being aggregated without consent. I understand if perhaps sentiments are different in a discussion forum mode, and your decision reflecting that. I appreciate the consideration you put into the matter.

Look, at a glance it looks to me like you're populating a monetised platform with content off the fediverse without attribution. That's strike one.

Then you seem to stall for time to implement federation while admitting your developer quit... and continuing the above content scraping. Strike two.

And from what I read in this thread it appears you're actively dodging defederation by using subdomains to keep scraping content. Strike three.

My concern in this is the integrity of the fediverse and its users. Yours, apparently, is "saving" a platform that leeches content off federated platforms to make a buck off those users. I don't see much chance of agreement on "what is fair".

@jwr1@kbin.earth, I stand by that request to defederate.

Ugh, sorry to hear about your experiences. Yeah, I'm not going to bat for all bus drivers. I'm speaking in favour of having a human onboard, because the passengers aren't necessarily an ideal crowd either...

The role of being a proxy authority figure can definitely turn some asshole drivers further to the dark side... I don't want to come off as defending those.

Yeah, the reasoning seems to have been "Think how much we'll save on driver salaries! Plus, the computer will never unionise or cause a fuss about hours." That's the only arguments I can think of.

At the same time, I can think of several times I've been glad to have a human driver on the bus, mostly to do with obnoxious fellow travelers...

Perhaps the real question is, are we ready for a world without bus drivers? I think they're a net positive in the daily commute.

I'm sort of okay with driverless trains — they are pretty much/ideally limited to the railway tracks. This has too many possibilities for error for my taste.

So close, and yet...

The "market economy" is the death cult. The notion that somehow market forces are inevitable, natural powers is the logical fallacy.

We are so primed to capitalist market thinking that we accept its dogma. As Frederic Jameson said, at this point it is actually easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.

It isn't the "rot economy"; It's the Economy, Stupid.