In a worker coop workers generally want, appreciate, and hire managers for themselves. But there are power dynamic diffetences:

• The workers are the boss
• Managers do not get overinflated compensation packages
• A typical max income differential of lowest to highest paid is 1:10

Managers help organize and facilitate production, but it is the workers themselves who have to be pleased.

That’s not to say some worker coop couldn’t choose to do without the manager role. Maybe some exist like that.

So is the nazi coowner getting ousted soon?

Right now we’re at “Mullvad is part nazi, nazi adjacent, nazi lite, moderately fascist, feudalism-curious” stage.

Sounds like the bosses positions should be cut then.

And in a worker cooperative that’s exactly what would happen.

“Reverse centaur”

(According to Cory Doctorow, a ‘centaur’ is a human augmented by tech, and a ‘reverse centaur’ is a human who is a mere meaty appendage to a tech system)

Piracy is copyright infringement. That’s different from larceny.

In no world is piracy ever stealing.

Today, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s most powerful particle accelerator, comes to the end of an extraordinary chapter in its scientific journey. Following its final physics run, the accelerator has been switched off to begin CERN’s Long Shutdown 3 (LS3), a major programme of maintenance, consolidation, upgrades and installation work that will prepare the Laboratory for the High-Luminosity LHC (HiLumi LHC), the next phase in the exploration of the fundamental laws of nature.

It’s getting an upgrade!

What a title.

Definitely you’d never say this during a jury selection process.

So watch the billionaires then. Watch the Epstein class.

No, they want to watch the proles instead.

I take it a sufficiently determined individual can bypass enough of redoit’s BS to get in.

You should choose wisely how to allocate your energies.

In this case, do you really want to lend your energy to an outfit that so actively disrespects your preferences? Think about what you are encouraging in your own world.

Even if you could get back on there, is it a good thing FOR You in the long run? Of course you could scratch the itch, but do you lose more than you gain over the long term?

Beyond just the personal energy budgeting, it also seems like we want a tech solution to a political problem. If we are to have a true tech public square, it seems very wrong to allow an unelected and unaccountable entity to own that square. So under no circumstance should you be banned from any public speech forum simply for speech (save maybe for making credible and actionable bodily threats). That’s a political guarantee that has to be enforced by a democratically accountable government. No single company can own and make admin decisions for the digital public square. That’s a political demand. Obviously that’s not how thing work today. But this may give you some ideas of what you may want to push for so that in the future you can avoid what happened to you recently.

All that meta info would need to be spoofed. Even spoofing the 80%, rather than all, might be enough.

Corporatuons must have legal limits to their size in people, capitalization, revenue, etc.

If we allow limitless growth then there won’t be a wall thick enough to hide us from all the bullshit.

Billionaires should not exist, and corporations must have strict limits too.

Having one corporation buy out every other one and get into every type of business is way too much power. Look at how things work in S. Korea where the president has to kiss the feet of the CEO of Samsung. Because Samsung is way too big and does way too many things. Corps like that are just begging to be split up.

Step 1: turtleneck

Step 2: reality distortion bubble

Step 3: massive profit

Look, I love the idea of a Linux phone.

But $500 and it manages my temptations for me? Fuck no.

The whole point of Linux is freedom.

Enough behavior shaping.

Even one billionaire is a policy failure.

The people getting tricked are CEOs and investors.

It’s at least a bubble if not a fad.

It’d be diffetent if the AI sales pitch were only tricking lonely people looking for text-only relationships.

I agree with you in a sense, but what a good trick it is.

Capitalism sucks:

• Private property fetishism (erodes the commons)
• Free market fundamentalism (prioritizes the freedoms of the biggest asset holders over the rest)
• Accumulationism (incentivizes hoarding far beyond where most people would have liked to stop hoarding if the system didn’t demand it)
• Consolidationism leading into economic royalism (mergers leading to monopolies, oligopolies, monopsonies, a two-tiered “justice” system, rules for thee but not for me)
• Transactionalism (no sense of society or priciples, but instead a system of backscratching where things only get done for their exchange value and for no other reason)

That’s the difference between libre software and merely open source software.

Libre licenses make it hard or impractical to close the source at a later date.

Open source licenses are much more permissive and allow any entity to produce a closed source derivation at any time.

Libre licenses are all about strategically protecting the software commons from privatization.

Is security of hardware pass or fail? And only Pixel passes while all other phones fail?

What makes Pixel so drastically preferrable?

I am starting to doubt GrapheneOS judgement here.

You’re saying even the 2nd best phone is a fail. I don’t buy it. Can a security researcher please comment?

Bring us some democracy while you’re at it.

if other phones met GrapheneOS’ security standards

This rhetoric is not OK.

Obviously security is important, but so is not financially aiding and abetting your enemy.

Graphene people are deeply unserious if they can’t understand the urgency of both points.

GrapheneOS needs to settle on the 2nd most secure system after Google, if Google is really the #1.

Cut Google’s hardware out NOW.