I'm from Germany, where this shameful history is part of our past. But even today, unfortunately, and even in my home country, there are resurgent forces that want exactly that once more: Hatred against everything that seems foreign to them. Don't let that happen anywhere in the world. Let history speak for itself and let us be wiser this time: never again this inhumanity, never again racism against whomever it may be directed at.
Sixteen in the clip and one in the hole
Nate Dogg is about to make some bodies turn cold
Now they droppin' and yellin', it's a tad bit late
Nate Dogg and Warren G had to regulate
I think the so-called KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) are a major problem of our time, because they are often defined incorrectly or misunderstood. All too often, decision-makers seem to think that the pure number of followers, for example, or engagement metrics such as likes would indicate that an account or post is successful. However, this is often not the case when other important metrics are taken into account. In e-commerce, for example, a large number of followers or high engagement figures in themselves mean nothing at all: it is not uncommon for e-commerce companies to invest a lot of money in social media management and for the KPIs of their accounts to rise accordingly - but still not sell anything via this channel (that means that the investment is not worth it, of course, because the costs are disproportionate to the sales generated; the ROI is often not good at all). I think a similar situation can be assumed for many science accounts on Mastodon, for example. Although the number of followers maybe not very high here because there are less active useres, the quality of comments can still be a lot higher. But unfortunately this cannot be quantified, or at least not easily. I therefore think that everyone should first think about what they want to achieve with their social media accounts. It then makes sense to define suitable KPIs instead of being impressed by what can be considered an indicator of success elsewhere and in a completely different context.
It's not some anonymous force forcing you to act like many of your fellow citizens do on social media. It's what the US believes, I'm affraid. Even on Lemmy. It's all "I don't like Trump" but strangely enough many still agree to some of his key positions when his name is not mentioned. It's weird.
You might want to check out the Patriot act (especially section 215) and how that plays into your believe of your constitutional rights. If there are any questions, just ask Clarence Thomas - he knows his stuff. I really don't get how you could be so blind to issues like that just because this post is about China. This is not a popularity contest - it is not US vs the world. This is about your rights, your data and your democracy. I'm from Europe and I'm kinda getting tired of reminding people from the US that your blind patriotism is just that...a blind spot that is used against the US citizens on every corner.
1984 is already a reality - in every country of the word, especially the US. Apple's famous Superbowl commercial from the same year, which suggested that data privacy (...) was important with regard to their strongest competitor at the time (IBM), does nothing to change this. On the contrary - none of this was even halfway true even back then. I really don't get why people think this is just an issue in China. It is an issue all over the world. For years and years.
That is certainly not wrong. However, I believe that it's not just the Chinese but that the US government (and other states around the world) has very far-reaching access to its citizens' data as well. Among other things, the Patriot Act makes it very easy to demand user data from companies without appropriate checks and balances, if the NSA is not already aware anyway. Without somewhat decent legal regulations such as those that exist in the EU for example, citizens have to trust that the state will not abuse this largely unregulated power. With regard to the question of who will form the next US government, I see a significant problem in this context: I think that Trump's right wing GOP will use this power against their political opponents and also, as a precaution, against ordinary citizens. I don't think they would shy away from setting up a surveillance state based on the Chinese model - the conditions for this are certainly met in the current legal situation.
Once again, we see what the debate between Harris and Trump illustrated very clearly: The GOP in its current state is not pursuing any program whatsoever, but merely builds up imaginary enemy stereotypes that they blame for all their problems - without any even halfway factual reasons. Democratic processes are impossible with this tedious kindergarten approach because they are based on factual arguments, cooperation and the willingness to find common ground. I sincerely hope that there are some rational thinking conservatives left who will refuse to vote for this hateful orange moron and his ridiculous henchmen.
He probably remembered his tasteless lie that he owned the tallest building in Manhattan after the Twin Towers collapsed. He said this to a TV station on 9/11/2001. No one asked him for this interview; he found it necessary to call there in order to flatter himself with falsehoods instead of mourning the victims. He hasn't changed a bit since then.
I think the only way to solve this problem for good would be to tie social media accounts to proof of identity. However, apart from what would certainly be a difficult technical implementation, this would create a whole bunch of different problems. The benefits would probably not outweigh the costs.
I don't quite understand why it's okay to pigeonhole people based on their age. It's the same obtuse logic that racism works on: You ascribe all your prejudices to a imaginary group that is defined by nothing more than a single characteristic - be it age, race, gender or whatever. Don't get me wrong, I'm a millennial myself and I think this post is funny. Other might not.
What I'm trying to say is that I can't quite understand that with all the political correctness that is rightly emphasized these days, age discrimination seems to be excluded.
I just don't think this form of discrimination is particularly helpful to anybody, as it also pits one group against another - just like rasicsm does. So please don't normalize that stuff just because it's the only ...ism left that is accepted in social media.
And just to get that out of the way: Ok, boomer or millenial comments in response to this comment are not particularly original.
I realize most that, but why risk the comfortable status quo? Perhaps it really is megalomania in the form of wanting to return to monarchy-like conditions in which the law not only pretends to apply to everyone, but is actually a law "by the grace of God". I can well imagine this, given everything that is apparently negotiable in America.
How can anyone think Trump should get a second term? I realize, of course, that neither the interests of the people nor common sense are a factor in the States, but even the most unscrupulous businessmen should realize by now that Trump is not an option. I mean, someone who manages to squander even such an exorbitant inheritance without any significant returns can't be considered a smart businessman or any good for business. The only way I can explain the support for Trump is that many influential people backed the wrong horse and are now committed - just the way these people handle their share transactions. But hey, I am not a US-American and so I can't help but get the impression that you all have lost your minds (even for thinking that this is in any way acceptable). How such a ridiculous circus can be possible in a so-called constitutional state is simply beyond me.
I'm from Germany, where this shameful history is part of our past. But even today, unfortunately, and even in my home country, there are resurgent forces that want exactly that once more: Hatred against everything that seems foreign to them. Don't let that happen anywhere in the world. Let history speak for itself and let us be wiser this time: never again this inhumanity, never again racism against whomever it may be directed at.