tt24

5 ms·

1.
by tt24 5d ago
So in your example a microwave company should be held liable if someone puts a child in a microwave?
2.
by tt24 5d ago
Fascinating perspective - any technology that has caused >0 deaths is a dead end and has no chance of improvement.
3.
by tt24 5d ago
lol Why do you have to immediately redirect Are you sensitive to this topic or something?
4.
by tt24 8d ago
Interesting that Bloomberg couldn’t swing his own election
5.
by tt24 12d ago
Clearly it’s not everyone else. You can see multiple replies to my comment expressing the same frustration that I am.
6.
by tt24 12d ago
Why don’t we pay people to dig ditches with spoons? It would produce jobs!
7.
by tt24 18d ago
Weird right? People’s brains seem to just turn off when this topic comes up. I’m used to it and even find it enjoyable at this point
8.
by tt24 18d ago
Then it should be pretty easy to explain right? I’ve seen the same reply to my comment multiple times. Each time it has nothing to do with what I said. I made no claim regarding businesses surviving or not surviving. Why do people keep repl
9.
by tt24 19d ago
> Can I assume that you're referring to the executives? Of course not, why would I be? I don't mind if a company decides to pay their employees a lot. In fact, I'd prefer companies pay their employees a lot!
10.
by tt24 19d ago
> management staff who produce nothing of value Interesting, first I'm hearing of this idea. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - do you have evidence to support this?
11.
by tt24 19d ago
How does this statement relate to my comment?
12.
by tt24 19d ago
> If a business cannot support civilization, then why should it continue to exist? Sorry, how does this relate to my comment?
13.
by tt24 19d ago
It's pretty simple - it doesn't bother me if a company decides to pay a worker a lot of money. They could decide to pay their CEO a trillion dollars and it would have zero effect on me. However, the government mandating a certain
14.
by tt24 19d ago
What does this have to do with my comment? Please don't bring up random unrelated stuff, you're welcome to add a top level comment for that.
15.
by tt24 19d ago
Woah, what's with the vitriol lol, let's relax a little bit
16.
by tt24 19d ago
What do minimum wage supporters expect to happen with people whose labor does not produce >= $minimum_wage worth of value?
17.
by tt24 27d ago
> But remember, the economies of scale first make things more the same and reduce variety, then enable eliminating competitors from the market, thus enabling enshittification at scale Source?
18.
by tt24 27d ago
Might be good to confirm that this is actually happening first :) Hysteria typically doesn’t lead to particularly good policy
19.
by tt24 29d ago
So Bezos has produced a more efficient option and was rewarded for it? I already said I like Amazon, you don’t have to convince me
20.
by tt24 29d ago
Sounds like the economy of scale option produced better results for consumers :)
21.
by tt24 1mo ago
> It might sound complicated if you live in a country where elections are won by who spends most money for airtime Which country are you referring to here? I’m not familiar with any that work like this. In the United States, Trump famous
22.
by tt24 2mo ago
> As far as I know the only thing that influences change is money. You are incorrect. The NIMBY movement has been extraordinarily successful despite severe opposition from moneyed interests. Bloomberg lost embarrassingly despite setting
23.
by tt24 2mo ago
Not thrilled about it but it would be way better than this
24.
by tt24 2mo ago
Why don’t they just have tariffs? It would be more honest haha
25.
by tt24 2mo ago
Not what the article says at all.
26.
by tt24 2mo ago
> only acted when the problems it was causing were serious and undeniable. I wish we lived in the word you think we live in :( In reality regulatory capture has infested nearly everything.
27.
by tt24 2mo ago
I’d have no problem with this as long as the building makes it known that it contains asbestos. Infinite scroll is immediately evident. Just don’t use it if you don’t like it
28.
by tt24 4mo ago
Ah, I see, you have an emotional / personal investment in this topic. That’s why my harmless request for evidence offends you. I won’t engage further then because it won’t be productive. I’ll continue to call out baseless claims of cou
29.
by tt24 4mo ago
In what way was I being opaque? I have no obligation to say “Give me evidence (btw I disagree with you)” lol. I’m sorry that asking your side to support its claims is so offensive to you. I can’t say I relate to this mindset. It’s completel
30.
by tt24 4mo ago
I very much have an opinion on the subject and never claimed otherwise. My opinion is that lobbying is a nonissue and there’s very little money in politics, and that money doesn’t really impact political outcomes. What makes you think that

More ›