this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
1686 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

60090 readers
2758 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
L4s
enu
1686
Twitter seems to ban all Threads links to reaffirm its position as a “free speech absolutist” platform (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/technology
133 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A search for Threads content on Twitter currently brings up zero results, despite plenty of links to Meta’s microblogging rival being posted on the platform.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Although it won't absolve one of crimes, affluenza seems to be a real thing. The social isolation and deference that money brings seems to have a host of well-documented psychological issues that accompany it. Musk, like Trump, seems to believe that he can do whatever he wants without meaningful consequences, because he exists in a bubble of sycophants and wealth, where rules for the plebs do not apply. Normal people can't burn this much good will and go on with their lives unhindered. Normal people would be permanently financially ruined if they lost that much doing stupid and illegal business moves.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Geez that's rough and must really suck. We should help all of those rich people get over their lack of personal connections. By taxing most of their money away.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Geez that's rough and must really suck. We should help all of those rich people get over their lack of personal connections. By taxing most of their money away.

This could be done in a generation if we made sensible inheritance laws, a wealth tax, or did away with capital gains and implemented an income tax with the highest bracket >90% like the US did in the 1940s-1960s instead, (provided this is done without loopholes.) There's huge benefits to living in a country with more economic equality in terms of crime, political engagement, home ownership, economic competition, social mobility, terrorism, poverty reduction, mental health, etc., It's harder to exploit people when they have resources.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

made sensible inheritance laws, a wealth tax, did away with capital gains, ...done without loopholes

So it's not going to happen, got it.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=IP2EKTCngiM

https://piped.video/watch?v=0b6ewG7hZXg

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Good bot

[–] joel_feila 3 points 1 year ago

ill check that out

[–] asunaspersonalasst 2 points 1 year ago

Meh, you don't work all the time.

[–] Syrc 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I just looked up the word, but isn't this "affluenza" something rooted in guilt and which leads to near-conscious self-destructive actions? I don't think it applies, Elon probably doesn't even know what guilt feels like.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

isn’t this “affluenza” something rooted in guilt and which leads to near-conscious self-destructive actions?

Not exactly. "Affluenza," is loosely defined, and definitions vary, but was popularized as a defense presented at Ethan Couch's trial with the premise that his killings were due to psychological effects of being wealthy and the lack of boundaries it afforded. Nowadays it's generally used to mean a behavioral illness caused by wealth/affluence.

[–] Syrc 1 points 1 year ago

Though Wikipedia itself says that:

The word is thought to have been first used in 1954, but was popularised in 1997 with a PBS documentary of the same name and the subsequent book Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic (2001, revised in 2005, 2014).These works define affluenza as "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety, and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more". A more informal definition of the term would describe it as "a quasi-illness caused by guilt for one's own socio-economic superiority".

The term "affluenza" has also been used to refer to an inability to understand the consequences of one's actions because of financial privilege.

So the first "popularization" seems to frame it more as a negative thing even for the self, while other definitions fit the case of Ethan Couch/Musk. Seems like the two definitions are pretty much opposites that use the same word, it's kinda confusing honestly lol