On the Democratic ticket Bernie Sanders would have been the outsider. But the Democratic National Committee under Debbie Wasserman Shultz made sure to avoid a vote by the people of the Democrat party and put in their chosen one, insider Hillary Clinton.
‘Were’? Has that changed? They got exactly what they voted for.
Yes, the ruling elite are typically outnumbered by the masses. It matters little: by historical standards, the ruling powers have virtually always leveraged their power to exploit those who don't have power. No reason to assume that streak will end.
Flock is dystopian. It’s also non ironically pitched as solving crime. it’s also our friendly neighborhood YC company.
It’s over.
USA has its comforts, that’s like the entire sell. Huge homes, huge lawns, huge plates, huge cars. Huge Walmarts. (the world cup brought some tourists and on X the Japanese shared their Walmart experience as basically a trip to Disneyland). Add movies, reality tv shows, game studios, and now gambling on anything because gambling in the stock market isn’t enough juice.
fuck we’re cooked.
I make fun of the French as much as anyone but one thing about them I really respect is the way they are keen to protest rather than simply roll over and let their government fuck them, as Americans and Brits do.
Protests and Boycotts don't work when doomers sit there yapping about how they don't work instead of participating. Counter movement bot farms encourage them to do so. We've all got to unplug, wake up, stand up, and live on our feet rather than die on our knees.
The universe may not be just, but it seems to set many things in motion if you want to participate.
There's no law in the constitution stating that you're allowed to steal all of humanities offerings and sell it back to to the public.
Its hard to believe just how many of you are this defensive of these companies and are just completely disingenuous, as if they give a shit about you.
I literally just typed "google lawsuit" and these came up.
https://www.federalcellularclassaction.com/
https://www.googleassistantprivacylitigation.com/file\
https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-approves-68-million-goo...
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/new-mexico-jury-finds-fa...
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2019/07/...
This regime have flagrantly violated their oaths of office, outright ignoring their Constitutional roles and instead acting in bad faith to achieve their own personal/political goals. These types of crimes aren't generally formalized and written down, which is why "high crimes and misdemeanors" is never defined out despite clearly being a thing. And as I said, the bar for conspiracy is quite low - investigation/discovery is when we find out exactly how much individual tech ceos have actively collaborated rather than merely placated.
We can save the formalities and technicalities, some of which will undoubtedly require novel precedents, for if they actually do see the inside of jail cells. But worries about how that might play out should not prevent us from demanding justice for what by all measures appears to be a concerted attack on the United States!
> These types of crimes aren't generally formalized and written down
Then they aren't crimes. To have a crime you need a law first. Someone then has to break that law. You need an authority that recognizes and can enforce that law. Then you need a conviction under that law and a legal authority that can met out punishment. If you don't have a law, you cant have a crime and you cant have a conviction for it.
> But worries about how that might play out should not prevent us from demanding justice for what by all measures appears to be a concerted attack on the United States!
So your solution is “lets make what they did illegal now, and then convict them for a current law for something they did in the past that wasn’t illegal at the time they did it”?
Seems to me to be a dangerous precedent to set and one that will be used against you whenever power shifts (and power always shifts).
I don't know what you mean by "take this to politician place". The topic is inherently political. We're talking about an apparent conspiracy to overthrow the Constitutional United States Government and replace it with unaccountable corporate government, spearheaded by the reactionaries in office working from the inside to paralyze and demolish the Constitutional government.
That behavior is most certainly in the realm of criminality, despite there not being a law that directly states it. Rather it's the kind of thing that needs to be decomposed into specific chargeable crimes by prosecutors, after having been investigated for the extent of communications, agreements, etc that effect the conspiracy. And then judges make an actual decision which intrinsically creates new precedents (ie common law) because these type of things don't happen every day.
Well, you wrote this, didn’t you?
>> This regime have flagrantly violated their oaths of office, outright ignoring their Constitutional roles and instead acting in bad faith to achieve their own personal/political goals.
You turned a simple question about what crimes were committed and convicted by tech leaders that deserved prison and decided to loop in a diatribe against the current administration. You apparently have an axe there you want to grind. So be it, but perhaps grind away on another thread appropriate to that topic.
> That behavior is most certainly in the realm of criminality, despite there not being a law that directly states it. Rather it's the kind of thing that needs to be decomposed into specific chargeable crimes by prosecutors, after having been investigated for the extent of communications, agreements, etc that effect the conspiracy. And then judges make an actual decision which intrinsically creates new precedents (ie common law) because these type of things don't happen every dao.
So…your answer is “no, they have not committed a crime for which they can be put in prison, but you really hope that some prosecutors and judges can get together to invent some way to parse legal behavior you disagree with into creating a precedent that can bypass congress’s responsibility to make law”. Good to know.
It is shit like this that make people like you fucking scare the shit out of me…way more than some tech bro training AI on copyrighted material (And to put that in perspective, I am one of those people who think AI is probably gonna eventually kill us).
> your answer is “no, they have not committed a crime for which they can be put in prison, but you really hope that some prosecutors and judges can get together to invent some way to parse legal behavior you disagree with into creating a precedent that can bypass congress’s responsibility to make law"
Uh, no, unequivocally. You're putting words in my mouth, of a hypberbolic straw man that you have created. As I said, you seem to be utterly ignorant about what is required for the legal system to actually operate - it's not a computer programming language. I suspect you know this, but it's just yet another thing you're playing coy about.
But that's not the point!
The point is that the laws are written by the oligarchs, for the oligarchs.
Laws are made to protect wealth and power, so of course the wealthy and powerful haven't "broken" them.
One can argue that the closest thing to an AI's training on a book is a person reading a book and remembering the details, which i'm sure you reject, but it's not prima facie unreasonable.
Five years ago this site was ready to burn you at the stake if you defended copyright laws, which clearly were only written to protect the rich and powerful, like Disney!
Now those laws are obviously there to defend the little guy against the oligarchs, and we should ready our pitchforks to march on Silicon Valley for daring to violate our precious copyright laws!!