I’ve said it before. Are they trying to bring back mob violence???
Removed by mod
They feel they’re prepared this time.
The owners have gotten so much better at propagandizing the peasants from birth with the media they own and the curriculum they inform having long captured state and federal governments that there are literally millions of poor victims of this system that will fight to defend it against their own interests.
True believers who kill themselves working for shareholders who would never even bother to learn their name, let alone let them into their country clubs, deluded into literally believing anything but this rigged market capitalist hellscape must be an evil marxist, Leninist, socialist, communist word salad of terms they don’t understand at all but were indoctrinated to hate and fear anyway blindly.
The owner’s numbers are tiny. Their doting, self-hating class traitors begging for senpai oligarch’s love that will never come are what prevents what you propose.
Removed by mod
Nononono. It’s not the super wealthy people that are the problem. It’s the poor people from a different ethnicity or gender that are the problem! And don’t even get me started about the middle class people from earlier generations.
Removed by mod
All that matters is SCOTUS in the end, and they are up for sale. My guess is that they already have their votes lined up.
Removed by mod
I’m down
deleted by creator
Yes.
Your target for non-violent revolutionary activity is the person three levels up from you in your org chart.
If you don’t have someone three levels above you, your objective is to quit, and blow the whistle on anyone above you.
All us old nerds know, but Shadowrun predicted this: corporate government .
Continuum had the concept of the corporate Congress
Underrated show.
City of London Corporation did it first
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval
The federal government needs to stop being so dickless with corporations
But but but muh campaign donations!
PACs, the best thing that ever happened to wealthy control over politics (from the douchey ownership class perspective.)
Nobody campaigns on eliminating PAC donations and criminalizing bribery.
Except me. Elect me and I will fix this shit with an iron fist. You are being taxed with no representation.
Might be time for some anti-trust lawsuits to make them pipe down.
Psh, it’s time we strip Musk of Starlink for his acts against the U.S. and then ensure a law that you have to pay taxes on stocks in the state where a companies headquarters is while restricting all companies who’s largest percentage of sales comes in the United States has to have a corporate headquarters in the U.S.
Removed by mod
If the NLRB is defanged then we’re back to just striking. Which uhhhh wasn’t good for the workers or the company. But fuck it. The Workers won last time and they’ll win again.
Right? Push people far enough and they’ll eventually snap back. How big of a snap back do they want? I feel like we’ll see a major labor movement in the next generation anyway.
1917
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Or, when it’s done as a class activity, the workers admit the deed, loud and proud, as a message to all the other billionaires.
That’s just a critical mass to revolt entirely, needs to be like 15% of the population actively involved. Read about Blair Mountain in 1921 if you’re unfamiliar.
Removed by mod
Amazing how many pussies and cucks are downvoting you
Amazing
Ahh yes. Advocating murder is definitely the way to get more people on your side.
It’s the only thing that works, you doormat
When the peaceful means of protest are ineffective, the only other option left to us is unpeaceful means.
All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.
Mao
If they’re going to argue they have protected rights like a US citizen then when they break the law they can go to jail like a human. Financial crimes, 6 month time out for Amazon. Worker dies because Amazon refuses a break, 25 year timeout.
The nerve of these fuckers.
So is trader joes
traitor joes
& starfux
Time to cancel prime
That’ll show em
It’s the only power I hold against them
You are absolutely correct and I wish people would ally against corporations more. At the moment there is a good sized movement against McDonald’s and Starbucks, but there are still enough people buying from them that they’re “ok.”
Removed by mod
Burn both of those companies down and we won’t lose anything of value (yes, many sites will go down because of aws, but just fucking migrate it)
just migrate it
THANKS IM CURED
Oh boy I needed that laugh
Lol, just migrate it… Like it’s that simple. Many companies have gotten vendor locked in to specific cloud providers and the services they offer. You can’t just flip a switch and move to Azure or somewhere else. Assuming other clouds even have the capacity to take on all of AWS clients all at once… And it’s not just websites, many government and even military servers are in AWS these days.
I guess if nothing else it would create new jobs, that’s important, right?
It would keep me gainfully employed. There would probably be a huge demand for OpenShift and its cloud agnostic design after that.
Oh well, sucks to be them!
Them is all of us. Things like Centers for Medicare and Medicaid run in AWS. Just about every service the government provides probably has some piece on AWS. Turning off AWS would not end well.
The physical servers would change ownership and the AWS standard between them would slowly diverge. Same kind of thing as the baby bells.
Do you mean the Bells that have reassembled?
Well yeah but when they were broken up one of the fearmongering things was the physical infrastructure. There’s no reason to believe this would be any different. Just hopefully with less monopoly a couple decades down the line.
This is a little different than a phone company. But you’re right that breaking them up would be the much more sane thing to do rather than shutting them down. It’s not easy to migrate servers, it is easy to change who you’re paying.
Oh well, sucks to be us!
Truth. Whenever I’ve asked an enterprise architect whether the company should really be vendor-locked to the point of using proprietary cloud-native services they say it will never matter. Tech workers think in terms of the two or three years they stay in each role.
(Amazon and MS are nothing on the extent to which Oracle owns you if you invite the Devil in.)
I work for Red Hat, we’re doing our best to fight that kind of vendor lock in. Hybrid cloud and expand out to whichever cloud you want. The vendor lock in is serious out there.
All the important military servers are secured. We could do with losing all the PowerPoints with a bad animated mascot telling you that you do in fact have to stop at a stop light.
deleted by creator
Nationalize it and roll it into NASA
deleted by creator
NASA hasn’t done much because they set a specific agenda to try to push “routine” space operations into the private sector, not because they aren’t able to.
It’s not like the companies that do this sprang up and started doing without assurances they would have business.
Saying that NASA hasn’t developed new rocket technology is just absurd. They haven’t built as many low Earth orbit launch vehicles. There’s a difference.
US tank command also hasn’t built many jeeps.I’m not sure why you saying it’s based on the Saturn 5 like that’s a bad thing. Modernizing a successful design isn’t a bad thing if you’re doing a similar thing.
deleted by creator
Literally basic research into differing mechanisms for rocket propulsion. What do you think they do? That took literally 10 seconds to find.
So, you see “old technology” as bad, while people who actually do the work see it as “tested”. What, exactly, do you think they need to change? Do you think they haven’t modernized the components? If you actually read about it, at all, you can read their considerations on reusability, upfront cost, refit cost, and usage cadence.
Basically, it’s more resource and cost effective to not reuse it.I’m not entirely sure what you’re saying with your four attempt thing. Do you think they developed their plans for a commercially viable orbital launch vehicle totally blind of NASA’s plans for commercialization of low Earth orbit? NASA was already doing commercial contracting when SpaceX started.
And you’re forgetting that their first launches were purchased by darpa.Your last point just sounds like you’re agreeing with me. NASA has been doing deep space rocket development, and leaving routine work to companies. I’m not sure why that’s so disagreeable, considering it’s what they said they were doing, and are very clearly doing.
Every bit of Space X’s business is built on the backs of NASA engineers. They are simply beneficiaries of radicalized privatization of public domains.
deleted by creator
What a joke.
deleted by creator
Yes. We could have had reusable rockets 30 years ago if we funded NASA properly. We chose not to. Now, decades later we got a private company managed by man-children accountable to no one burning billions and billions in play money exploding shit in a manner that NASA would never be allowed to do until they finally, by some miracle, got a reusable rocket, and we’re all acting like “omg how amazing.” Give me a break. Not to mention that now we just have a bunch of trash in space.
deleted by creator
But I don’t think it has changed for the better. Private industry can now cheaply and easily put trash in space, and they have been at a stunning rate. Literally nothing good can come of this at all.
This isn’t about Musk. If Bernie Sanders owned SpaceX I’d be saying the same thing. I do not want private citizens to have the power to launch objects into space. Period. Unless those objects are themselves and the target is the sun.
Im fine with them launching a rocket if theres a altitude activated brick of C4 taped to the rocket.
THEN YOU AGREE that all funding to Space X should be stopped until Musk is purged from leadership.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Yes, thank you. Drunk trying.
Typing, goddammit!
Removed by mod
Such un-American behavior
People should start protesting in front of these billionaires houses only then they will learn
Inside* these billionaire’s houses.
Removed by mod
Canned water from the alps shipped worldwide is very stupid though. It’s not on topic here but fuck these companies too. This branding is also incredibly cringy in any other setting than a party where you want to fit in with beer cans while not drinking. And let’s not pretend that most people that drink this don’t have access to potable water on tap.
Nice can, but they are on my shit list for not making it clear that their drinks are sweetened with agave nectar.
Also, that’s kind of rich from a company with a $700 million valuation, which is only going to grow and will likely make the founder a billionaire. He’s already very wealthy.
What’s wrong with agave nectar? And doesn’t it say it right there on the front of the can?
No it doesn’t. See the picture I posted. And what’s wrong is that it isn’t honest to not make that clear. The other flavored seltzers are not sweetened.
I dunno, it feels like kind of a stretch to be angry at them for you not looking at the label or calories.
It says it’s flavored, and if you turn the can at all it says it has agave in it, and then it has calorie information and the list of ingredients.
It’s kinda on you the read the ingredients if you care in my opinion.
Please name another brand that calls itself flavored sparkling water that has sweetener in it.
La Croix doesn’t.
Bubly doesn’t.
Polar doesn’t.
Perrier doesn’t.
Waterloo doesn’t.
As far as I know, the only brand that advertises itself that way and is sweetened is Liquid Death. I consider that dishonest. I don’t think I should have to look at the ingredients label in that sort of situation.
Spindrift. Clearly Canadian.
If something says it’s flavored water it’s totally on you to check and see if those flavors are sweet or have calories.
If it were difficult to read the label of find the information I’d be more sympathetic to the complaint, but in the mango drink you mentioned, it’s literally on the side of the can, maybe a quarter turn?
The other flavored seltzers are not sweetened.
To be fair, this one is an Arnold Palmer, not a seltzer.
Again, not the one OP pasted, the one I pasted. The Liquid Death Mango Chainsaw can. It does not say agave anywhere. It is sweetened with it, unlike all other flavored seltzer brands.
It literally says on the front of the can that is got agave.
Yes. On that can. Again, look at the can I posted in my reply below. In fact, I’ll paste it again. You tell me where it says it on that can.
I cannot think of another brand that offers flavored sparkling water that puts sweetener in it. The whole idea is that it doesn’t have any sweeteners. It’s dishonest.
I searched flavored seltzer and clicked on the first few results.
It doesn’t seem to uncommon for flavored beverages to have sweetener and calories.
It for sure says it on the can, but it’s not on the front of the can. This page has photos of the whole can, and agave nectar is in the beverage description (photo 3) as well as the second ingredient in the ingredients list.
Are they displayed that way in the fridge at the gas station where you live? Because they aren’t around here.
All Spindrift flavored seltzers are sweetened with fruit juice.
It says agave on the front of the can. What’s the problem?
I’m asking because I don’t understand, but do agree with everything else that you’re saying.
It sure doesn’t on Mango Chainsaw, which was what I drank until I looked at the ingredients.
What’s the issue with it tho? Is it some slave labor shit or something?
No, I just don’t like dishonesty. No other flavored seltzer has sweetener in it because that goes against the whole idea.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
