I find articles on the onion to be funny in some way. This was just naked approval of the status quo.

I think “describing it as if it were normal” only helps the people who support this arrangement because it gets normalized. That’s where the accusation of conservatism came from, that and the way they tried to shut me down with insults.

Edit: given that there are likely to be a lot of people that agree with this argument unironically, doesn’t it seem irresponsible to play some game where you pretend like you support it? Without ever coming out against it at the end?

Really, it’s just naked approval, with any disapproval left as an exercise to be performed by the reader.

Ii is the real state of the world, but I don’t see any disapproval in the text.

Who would build any sort of factory if they did not know that many people would be available to take the jobs at low-pay rates

Much of the hunger lirerarure talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense

No one works harder than hungry people.

[…]well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work

For those of us at rhe high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster.

I guess the irony is lost on me. Nothing here indicates that it’s wrong or should change. Also, you’re a huge asshole.

Edit: in fact I know people (conservatives) who are totally fine with this arrangement. They are huge assholes too, huh isn’t that weird.

This is just a bad thing to say to someone. That’s all.

It’s fucked that the author appears to support such an arrangement…

No, the text is pretty fucked, too

The relatively new Nostr protocol is a very interesting decentralized option. It uses relay servers to provide a secure connection between two (or more) clients which maintain the data, nothing is “stored” on the relay.

I want the issue of mass surveillance / data collection to be addressed, instead of this bs which is basically working around the edges the problem. Tick-tock shouldn’t be allowed to sell (/provide) user data to anyone but neither should Meta, X, reddit, etc.

No, they’re both bad.

Lol

What is the social security system was run by China?

That’s your great analogy. This is a social media company. Gtfoh

It’s a bad analogy. Mass surveillance (continuous collection of everyone’s data) has very little to do with the number we use to track social security payments.

We’re talking about individuals’ personal data stored by social media companies being accessible to others (governments, in this case). This has nothing to do with social security.

The problem is that the data is accessable, but that’s not being addressed. This is an improper fix to an actual problem, just facts.

Access to the data it’s what matters, ownership is just one method of access.

I literally rearranged the headline wording

CrowdTangle is Meta’s tool for election integrity, they’re shutting it down without a replacement.