![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
I don’t think they are federated? Neither is the other big community whatever it’s called.
I don’t think they are federated? Neither is the other big community whatever it’s called.
Ah yes very fair. I did not do a close reading and missed that, I did not notice or see how careful you were with your language, your explanation is much appreciated!
Wow, appreciate the resources. Commenting to view this later…
I think that’s fair.
Is the presumption that any confusion from labelling them as such is actually not anywhere near the value of like pointing out the alleged truthfulness which comes from the analogy made by labelling people in Israel as such?
Sorry for the direct language I have ASD, I’m just trying to understand what people mean usually but it’s been told to me that it is rude or offensive so I apologize if that is the case.
They might be saying that they don’t give the same weight to the kinds of information on ‘the same news’ perhaps because there’s other stuff he’s paying attention to. Idk, that sounds pretty reasonable to me. I think it’s easy to say people at the top of the political pyramid don’t value human lives the same as those at the base.
I think it’s work that does the work, a tautology, I think using money as a proxy for work is a convenient hop and skip. When it comes down to a rigorous analysis (of the kind say a climate scientist does in a life-cycle assessment money is to vague a reason. What does it represent? Some amount of gold? Well, the US dollar is no longer pegged to gold à la Bretton Woods, how then does ‘money talk’?
I was meaning to respond but I think other’s have. I have one of those 30+ min YouTube videos or similarly ridiculously long blog posts (and a longform article somewhere…) though I think you might not be interested so I’ll keep it to myself unless you are interested in a good faith argument (argument, root word is the latin argumentum, to make clear; prove), I would rather not waste your time or my breath if that isn’t the case.
The rule of law in a specific geographic area in a specific period of time isn’t nearly as important as the meaning conveyed which is misleading.
Rather than missing the forest for the trees, why might he push for the title of founder? Why might some discredit his efforts and tactics in assuming the founder of title in specific contexts?
He did not play a meaningful role in the beginning of the company and is not responsible for its success. Money was responsible, the two founders’ expertise was responsible, that specific person is not special enough for their contribution to matter much. Anyone can supply capital especially during the inflated economic conditions (of which we are suffering the consequences of now) and during the time where EV and technology at large was developed enough to allow such developments to take place.
Willing to admit my ignorance. Thanks for the info.
Wholeheartedly agree. Though I am not sure I would agree with your framing of it being ‘left’ or ‘right’. For sure the content seems to have more vitriol and divisiveness. I would use it in the past to follow scientists and their updates about research, it was really good for that.
Now the majority of those I follow post inflammatory comments or reactions to other content and I find the content writ large has decreased. I’ve so far increased my RSS, IRC, and mailing list usage, but it was nice to have tweets which are character-limited. I could skim through easier without having something catch my attention.
I remember they used to own Lenovo. Ngl, I feel that it’s thrived after it was sold, their Yoga line and novel products are very interesting.
thank you for your service 🫡