Thanks Margot, for taking some time out of your busy schedule to post this fabulously intricate meta-contribution on bots, identity, and social media! Its much appreciated.

Arbeiter wollen Ausgleich der Inflation, genau wie das Management

Management: “Das geht nicht aus Gründen.”

Ist schon klar, ihr Pfeffersäcke.

Wow, that biography is a wild ride, culminating in “his 100th birthday, during which Anton Nilson himself held a speech lasting for several hours”.

Best of luck to the Swedish workers at the Tesla plant in any case.

What brain-dead form of utilitarianism is that supposed to be? The “I’m-16-and-on-a-wikipedia-bender”-kind?

We don’t hold 6-year-old children accountable for very much in a legal sense, because they are essentially animals able to (barely) speak. Thats why we instead regulate gun-ownership, so that no child has access to firearms. And if that doesn’t seem to do the trick yet, I’d suggest regulating more comprehensively and holding parents accountable, so that it is very much in their own interest to keep guns from kids. We might also fund social services and schools to the extent that children are able to adequatley learn how to control their emotions and verbalise anger, unhapiness in a non-ciolent way, even if their parents are a bunch of irresponsible idiots.

That seem much preferable to executing a six year old every once in a while to be save.

Constitutional renewal every generation?

As a non-USA-Citizen, this is what always gets me about the originalists at SCOTUS: the idea of changing the constitution to reflect what the majority of US citizen believes is simply not possible anymore, because of outrageous distortions of the process. Given how unequal voters are distributed across states and the effective veto power of very small states, there is no way for the majority of people to do what the originalists demand: adapting the law so that no interpretation is necessary.

What makes originalism and those that represent it so incredible stupid is THAT THEY ADMIT THIS. Scalia used to chuckle in interviews when this was pointed out to him.

the messaging has been consistently toned down in the hopes people would listen.

My guess is its even more than this: deadlines were extended to not let people fall into inaction. The tipping point always close enough so that its dangerous, but still far away enough so that there is still hope. It is a ploy analogous to the fascist “the enemy is strong enough to be dangerous and weak enough to be thoroughly defeated.”

This scene is far more realistic, I think. But as you can tell, it doesn’t play very well with either the audience or the media.

Question is what do you do then? First, you try to reach profitability. Get out of the red by milking users and reducing costs, but there is little chance to get that really sweet ROI that you dreamt of in the last decade. What do you do next? My guess is that we will see some websites change ownership into some shadier hands in the next years. The personal data collected could still be worth something after all.