- 0 Posts
- 15 Comments
12·27 days agoI don’t understand what you’re getting at. Of course tech companies have a lot of employees if you count all the “mechanical turks”. That’s simply misleading.
None of that has much to do with what my original comment was about.
You’re saying that it’s impossible for powerful, completely degenerate people to be capable of playing their power games.
My take on this is that a look at the history books proves you wrong. LinkedIn-style fairy tales about leadership and all that bogus doesn’t change much about that.
Because they have the money to do so. Those who have it simply pay good people. You should know this if you’ve ever dealt with large companies. It doesn’t take good management—just the money to pay the people who do the work. You should also know that giant online corporations like Meta have an incredibly small number of employees compared to industrial companies, and labor is the biggest cost factor in any business.
What do you actually do for a living? You claim to have insights. Where did you get them?
I’d be an idiot to say here what I do for a living, but yes, I regularly deal with CEOs -and it’s precisely this experience that makes it all the more likely to me that a conspiracy like the one mentioned above is underway. While I’m nowhere near that level, I’m still quite familiar with the politics in companies with 500 or more employees. For me, this is all the more reason to entertain such thoughts, because I know of hardly any company where performance or competence is even remotely appreciated. The people I know as “the decision-makers” should actually be the very last ones to make decisions—they’re self-absorbed, unscrupulous people.
This is a conspiracy theory, but is it really so far-fetched to assume that the most powerful 1% of the populations are joining forces worldwide to establish something like a global feudal regime?
It’s entirely feasible, since we’re talking about just a few thousand people here.
In any case, these people have one thing in common: they view democracy as a problem. This applies to Trump just as much as it does to Putin and Jinping. The same goes for their henchmen, such as Merz in Germany, for example.
It’s not that unthinkable when you consider the fundamental idea behind fascism, as shaped by Mussolini in his day: a brotherhood of the elites striving for absolute rule.
It seems to me that this is now the agenda, especially since in the U.S., with the pseudo-intellectual concept of “Dark Enlightenment,” there doesn’t even seem to be any attempt to hide it.
I’m not usually a fan of such ideas, but it does seem very, very suspicious to me, given that the leaders of the world’s most powerful countries are apparently doing everything in their power to undo the civilizational progress of the last hundred years—and are clearly doing so in a fairly well-coordinated manner.
That man deserves life in prison for his war crimes.
I realize that’s superficial, but someone with a beard like that can’t possibly be up to anything good…
That’s true, but only for ordinary people like us…
This is by no means a problem with the U.S. legal system—it is its very purpose. It is the instrument of power that enables a tiny minority to rule over the majority.
The law has very little to do with justice, as is evident from the fact that Clarence Thomas is not in prison but is a Supreme Court “justice.”
I don’t think Russia plays much of a role here, but yes, absolutely: Trump and his henchmen are, in my opinion, merely accelerating the decline of the U.S.
This former superpower is clearly on its last legs, as too many resources have been embezzled—as is typical in oligarchies. Therefore, aggression is all that remains for it, since its bloated military apparatus is the only thing left, alongside the IT sector, which is currently dismantling itself for the very same reasons that led to this situation.
China is also a misanthropic autocracy, but the policies of its leaders are nonetheless far-sighted, forward-looking, and skillful, which is why China is already the superpower that the U.S. once was (albeit it’s glory was bought on credit after WWII).
Europe’s future, in my view, depends on whether it will be possible to shake off the influence of the U.S. and its disastrous turbo-capitalism. Unfortunately, it does not look that way, because in the strongest European countries, neo-capitalist forces are still at work, whose maxim is now turning into fascism precisely because their approach is no longer competitive in today’s world.
Either way, dark times are ahead for science—and, consequently, for humanity as well.
Yes, that’s right. I recently spoke with five friends of mine who are chief physicians and senior physicians in Spain, Switzerland, and Germany: They all agreed—the U.S. is no longer conducting scientific research; the CDC, which used to be a globally important institution because many countries followed its guidelines, no longer exists, since all competent staff who refused to go along with this absurdity were fired.
They are appalled at how quickly this decline was orchestrated by the Trump regime, especially since it took decades to reach an international consensus. All of them have lost all trust in U.S. institutions and believe that these inhumane policies will cost hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide.
No, I don’t think so at all, but depending on whether the Democrats field a reasonably progressive candidate, there’s at least a slim chance. If not, and it comes down to the usual corporate Democrats—who, contrary to the will of the voters, clearly call the shots at the DNC—there’s no chance from the get-go.
For the Conservatives, however, this chance does not even exist in the first place.
So the Democrats are still the lesser evil, because the conservatives are not only many times more corrupt, they’re also completely unscrupulous in their inhumane actions.
With a Democratic president, at least, it would still be possible to engage in dialogue on the international stage. A conservative, on the other hand, represents exclusively the interests of organized crime, as the current regime demonstrates day in and day out: It commits horrific war crimes, does nothing but enrich itself and its billionaire financiers, openly threatens even the U.S.’s former allies with armed force, and is doing everything in its power to replace international law with the law of the jungle.
These people are the scum of humanity. The conformist, greedy opportunists among the Democrats are certainly despicable as well, but even they are no match for the absolute monsters currently ruling the country.
Look up the term “Dark Enlightenment” —this far-right, inhuman “theory” is the foundation of what conservatives stand for and what they are working exclusively to bring about, since it benefits the billionaires and would give them absolute power without any restrictions. Should they continue to succeed in this, it would have enormous, negative consequences for other, still somewhat functioning democracies around the world.
In short: A democratic president would definitely be the lesser evil—for the world as well as for the U.S. Anything that weakens the current regime is absolutely desirable.
That’s because he doesn’t want to go to prison.
What I meant by that was that many tech companies hire people, who frequently perform these tasks on a project basis for only short periods of time, and pay them a pittance for their work. Their numbers are likely to fluctuate greatly.
I was by no means trying to emphasise the fact that these people mostly live in countries where wages are particularly low and where there are virtually no labor protections; I was simply pointing out that they are usually hired on a short-term basis.
This exploitative practice, as well as other “gig-work” arrangements, is unfortunately quite widespread, especially in the tech industry, and serves to increase corporate profitability. Many tech companies use this approach to reduce the number of permanent employees—a practice that, of course, isn’t unique to the tech industry—but using these practices there are many tech companies that generate astronomical revenues with a comparatively small workforce.