They also assert that Bluesky doesn’t federate (it currently doesn’t, but the protocol is designed for federation!) when it’s clear that it now does.
I’m not surprised about the skepticism there though. These are just promises, and we all know that a for-profit entity will happily sacrifice any promies if it means they make more money that way. Also depending on how exactly that federation will work it might be practically useless as well.
FFS. That’s not how any of this works. I’m kinda tired of pointing out the issues because your mind is clearly set, so it’ll be just a few.
Example: you own 3 businesses worth 500 mil $ each (or whatever combination makes sense to you). To make business in a country with this mindset or even travel through it, you can only own up to 999 mil so you either give away 501 mil worh or you are banned from said country.
Ahh I see. My bad, that’s even dumber than I thought. For starters, you do realize that net worth is a made up number that cannot actually be calculated, right? It’s an educated guess, at best.
There is a lot wrong with this thinking, like the fact that “net worth” is not some official number you can actually calculate, it’s just a guess.
Your argument is in bad faith because you‘re not actually in the position to be affected by the negative impact of this
So because (you think) it doesn’t affect me I can’t voice my opinion on it and it’s automatically bad faith because I disagree? Wow, what a way to discuss.
If your idea led to a change in economy (which it most definitely would), it would affect me. It’s kind of sad you don’t realize that that is a possibility. Comparatively tiny changes in taxation have had massive impact on some industries, companies, and thus the people employed there.
Billionaires arent smart, they start privileged and are ruthless. We dont need ruthless to survive as a species, nor do we need it to live a good life. I say we need to get rid of it to survive.
I see you’ve met a lot of rich people and know how they operate, why they do what they do, and that all their wealth has been obtained immorally to say the least. That kinda tells me all I need to know.
Additionally, in opposition what daddy corpo tells you, competition is what makes things evolve. All companies that have killed off competition have slowed down improvement, made everything worse for the customers. Competition between companies is what keeps them improving, not monopolisties.
I’m talking about competition for your country (or whatever region that would enact such rules). That’s not a good thing, not for the people living there who would (supposedly) push for such change.
Like, look. I get your sentiment, I also don’t like how companies evade taxes and that there’s a squeeze on the middle class where a tiny fraction ascends to the 0.01% of wealth while everyone else is pushed towards poverty. That all sucks and should be addressed. But the way you think it can be fixed is just nonsense and sounds like something a 15 year old with no idea how the world works came up with.
That makes absolutely no sense. For one, it’s not like there are people who have a billion dollars salary - that’s just not how it works.
Second, if you make a hard cutoff like that you disincentivize producing anything above that cutoff, so nobody would ever bother actually making that money if you take it all away anyway.
Third, if your taxes are too too drastic you’ll just drive those people and their investment (which - like it or not - still usually has some positive impact) away creating competition for yourself in regions with less strict taxes effectively kneecapping yourself.
I’m not against them but there are definitely better places for solar panels (like rooftops), and replacing valuable topsoil with anything is a bad idea.
Meanwhile solar energy plants where I live took up valuable agricultural land and they spray the topsoil with horrible herbicides because mowing it is too much work.
Why not judge these instances on their own merit though? If what you say becomes true and is so problematic and rampant that it needs addressing, you can block that instance. But doing so preemptively seems petty and counterproductive at best.
What if there is an instance that selectively reposts from Threads only decent, thoughtful discussions?
Oh and as a side note; if you’re worried about stuff getting more mainstream, toxic and polarized that’s kinda inevitable if you want more people using the fediverse, that’s just how it is when lots of differently thinking people are in one place.
At least if you break something it’s just you who you have to deal with.
…or maybe they just don’t want a busy looking logo.