People really need to stop giving a fuck about what “businesses” think about political candidates, and anything in general.
Silicone valley can go fuck itself!
and gimmie back my data!
Tech workers want affordable housing? No way.
H1B slaves get to share a 2 bedroom minivan.
To keep oppressing the american tech workforce costs money or something.
They’re worried he does well and more people like him show up on their home turf.
Also, Streisand Effect.
I’m very surprised that people are so scared about a mayoral election. Yeah it’s NYC but like it’s not like he’s gonna have that much reach that the fucking PM of Israel needs to make a statement about it.
The NYPD have offices in Israel.
Why?
Exactly, but they do.
that’s how much they fear anything that even remotely resembles actual socialism.
I … suspect it might be more that they are scared of the racial component. Not even “scared”.
Silicon Valley is a burgerhole of Curtis Yarvin, dreams of technofascism with its inhabitants on top, impunity with wages not quite mirroring quality, and a bit - American academic culture. And American academic culture is the fucking opposite of the European one, or so I’ve read.
race is something the ruling class still takes advantage of to divide us. they fear we are getting too aware and… unsatisfied, hence the recent stuff. they might even win, but they are clearly fearful atm.
A funny idea, but not always. Some of the “ruling class” are genuinely racist.
It’s a logical continuation of them being on top. Some people are better than others, in their opinion. They are better than those not of their group and set of opinions, their country (sometimes of residence and not where they rule) is better than other countries, their ethnicity is better than other ethnicities, and their race is better than other races. The reason they want to impress these hierarchical divisions is they want to impress their worldview, not to create division.
So, again about USA. You guys have that crap in everything. That’s why motivational letters by American students to European universities are a comedy genre. You don’t even see it, but your official tone (and even much of the political discussions and social one) is half bullshit, half markers of identity (that kind of neighborhood, that kind of ancestry, that kind of some other tribal classification, all clear cut and exclusive). Well, there are also markers of connections thrown here and there. And your discussions are usually not discussions, they are like playing cards with those markers instead, where one marker beats another, there can be no discussion after that.
Sigh. I have relatives in the USA who moved there long enough ago to be carriers of that and other things too, so when my uncle was helping me with writing a CV, for the initial variant I just followed his advice and I’m not ever showing that pretentious crap to anyone. Despite him being a tremendous help with my executive dysfunction (and unfortunately impediment where he conditioned one project on me finishing uni, I still haven’t finished uni, it’s indefinitely paused).
yup, yes they are. the foundation is all rotten.
and i’m happily not from the us.
eh, sorry, I’m sometimes starting to get a feeling most people in the English-speaking interwebs are from the US, and I’m a fool playing in the wrong sandbox
a good reminder that no
i make the same mistake often here. lemmy is more diverse than it looks.
Curtis Yarvin
Who dat?
The jerk has his own Wikipedia page.
Basically an ideologist of what you get if you remove NAP and common property of unmade resources from ancap. Would be a funny thought experiment if there weren’t crowds of people, working in those big companies, thinking his ideology is good and right.
Alt-right writer that has dreams of replacing the role of president with the powers of a CEO or King. The media has been helping him rise in influence otherwise he’s a crackpot
exactly. the ruling class needs to eliminate the virus before it spreads.
See also the entire American Indochina war, where they tried to bomb Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos into being friends with them
That’s the second Indochina war, and American bombing was mostly done against Vietnamese targets in the jungle in the neighboring countries, so mostly it was still Vietnam. But yes, they regularly hit civilian targets in the neighboring countries.
The first Indochina war was France testing its contemporary new and shiny western military doctrines in the wild and finding them lacking.
In general this seems to be a pattern, western nations indeed value lives of their soldiers very much. I doubt it’s because of humanism (they don’t value enemy civilian population’s), rather because of inherent racism. But it shows in the doctrines, they are always looking for a way to create a situation where they can hit their enemy, but their enemy can’t hit them, and where they are moving so much faster than their enemy, that their enemy could as well be a sitting duck. To create a baby beating disposition. That’s harmful for military’s experience and esprit de corps, but appeals to the western nations’ feel of superiority. Long term harm, short term impressions.
So - it didn’t work. They were using air logistics and supply depots in a system all over the place and small expert mobile forces and all that stuff the western public still considers proper way of fighting a war. In other words, they tried to cheat. And Viet Minh just did their work honestly, in many small steps, over long enough time.
Of course the French logistics were conditioned by fighting on the other side of the globe from metropoly, and Viet Minh fought at home. But honestly it seems to be a pattern in all wars for any European nation, ideas of superiority and quick spectacular solution are always replaced for more classical understanding once actually tried. It’s a cliche that USSR’s approach was mass assault with no regard for lives, but, ahem, Tukhachevsky is one of the creators of the ideas that became Wehrmacht’s doctrine in the beginning.
While the USA in Vietnam decided to show another thing - that they are not France and can just burn all of the fucking jungle with their power. And they burned much of that, except their population wasn’t ready even for the pretty moderate losses there (like 4x what USSR lost in Afghanistan).
He’s proving the point that the DNC has denied for well over a fucking decade: stop listening to money, start listening to people, and you will win. That’s it. That’s the whole argument.
And the DNC establishment is scared shitless, because they know it’s working, and they know more people are gonna run campaigns like he’s doing, and there’s gonna be a sea-change in terms of what the fuck the Democratic Party is (that, or a third party is going to spawn and absolutely fucking crush the DNC).
The neoliberals are looking down the barrel of a gun right now, and they know they put themselves there.
It’s telling when most of the Congress dnc votes with the GOP, or at least don’t put up a fight when gop constantly walks over them
I just saw another candidate doing similar running for a Senate seat in Maine. He’s already said he would vote out Schumer
Also Omar Fateh for mayor of Minneapolis, Abdul El-Sayed for senator of Michigan, Kat Abughazaleh for Illinois representative, and probably more I’m not aware of. It’s encouraging to see candidates like these get traction.
Fuck… that’s a compelling take.
None of what he is doing is unique. There are plenty of dem candidates that have listened to people over money. dems are worried about associating with him because he has controversial opinions that might not go down so well outside of NY. Pretty much everything you’ve said is just fantasy you’ve invented.
His positions are actually quite in line with mainstream America. Most Americans now criticize Israel’s war on Gaza. Most Americans believe the rich are under-taxed. Most Americans believe the rent is too high. Mamdani is not the boogeyman that conservatives claim.
Except that what he’s doing he can actually do. Someone who ends up in Washington and gets outvoted by the majority centrists isn’t a bad thing, and actually sorta helps their image without forcing any real change. Mamdani, though, he’s the top dog in a mayoral position and can actually get shit done. They’re scared of him not because his ideas are unique but because they can actually be realized at this scale.
Except that what he’s doing he can actually do.
How can you say that when hes only just won and still hasnt done anything?
Because I know how cities work, ya dingus.
What is he doing/done that would actually a game changer? Tell me why I should be excited about him because it seems to be that the only unique thing about him is he openly criticizes isreal. Dont get me wrong, I like most of his policies and I think hes an ok mayoral choice I just dont see the reason for the excitement and I feel like all the “establisment is scared” articles are fake hype by PR firms.
Except I literally already told that being unique is less important than being able to actually do what’s promised. New Yorkers understand the power that a mayor has and know that he can get this shit done for their city. His policies are good and they’re a strong swing away from the center and the right and people are excited about that, and he’s been shown to even explicitly say he won’t make promises he can’t even attempt to keep(price of eggs, anyone?).
The establishment hates this because he’s doing things they know will energize people and show them just how much better things could be. The US has long operated on the bullshit idea that they couldn’t have nice things because “it’s different here!” but that’s always been a lie that was easy to tell because the good shit was happening across an ocean that many US citizens couldn’t even point to on a fucking map. Now it’s going to be right there, in their big New York City, and it’s going to be hard to ignore.
I’ve explained all this in the previous comments, you can re-read them if you need to.
I was with you until the sentence you concluded with, which is frankly categorical bullshit.
ok? I dont hate Mandami I just think most of his policies are meh and as far as left wing candiates go hes weak.
The “Left” in the US…
Y’all demonize Sanders for being the red devil but the old fart would be seen as center-left at best in most european countries.why would you think I demonize Sanders? I said “left” not far left or center left. I disagree he would be center left at best in Europe but it doesnt matter. Sanders is what I consider a good left wing candidate maybe not so much today because hes to old but before.
“Y’all” ≠ “You”
You’re entitled to that opinion; I’m entitled to disagree with your opinion.
Just one thing to add here, respectfully.
You’re both entitled to deez nutz.
Eyyyyyyyy gottem
He won’t affect global policy much at all. He’s a threat to the mega wealthy because he’s a symbol of change in the American people.
This is the same reason the elite went so hard on the communist scare late last century. Back then certain political views were almost a criminal offense. Hopefully history doesn’t repeat itself here.
Oh, he is a threat. He is a huge threat for the fascists.
He’s a threat because he’s not on their side. He’s a (much needed) icon of disunity.
They’re right to be afraid. They need to stop him and anyone like him at all costs. If there’s just one county whose sheriff isn’t wagging his tail to goons like ICE, that’s unacceptable.
And this isn’t about some sheriff election, it’s the mayor of NYC. Y’know, the place where Rudy Giuliani became the greatest mayor in the entire history of the US (until he blew it by siding with Trump). Of course they’re afraid.
If people can find shelter from ICE and the rest in just one county, that’s bad for the fascists. Having it be a huge place like NYC would be a disaster in their eyes.
He won’t affect global policy. But he will affect the populace of US places other than NYC. If he wins, some may look at NYC and think “Why can’t we have this?”. That’s what’s dangerous.
The rise of fascism in the mid-1920s to late 1930s was a direct response by the ruling capitalists to the ascent of real, populist/socialist/communist changes that actually threatened their power and wealth for the first time in history. It happened all over the world (well at least Europe), and it totally makes sense what we’re seeing now all over the world.
Related watch for those interested in learning more: https://youtu.be/7f_V9zZNzTY
almost a criminal offense.
My knowledge of this topic is based pretty much on just Hollywood movies, but I was under the impression that it was a criminal offense.
almost
[Citation Needed]
McCarthy hearings?
They’re worried he will succeed and serve as an example that the people rather than money are in charge, if they could only realize it.
If they truly believed Democratic socialist policies had no legs, they’d leave him alone and watch him fail as an example.
Realizing a class war instead of the culture war people have been fighting for decades
The real battle isn’t left or right. It’s up vs down.
Tax wealth not work!
sort of, except the right usually (fucking always) fights to protect the rich. while the left (no Democrats don’t fucking count) fight for equality and improving everyone’s lives.
so it is a left v right, you just renamed the categories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect
The ratchet effect is a concept in sociology and economics illustrating the difficulty with reversing a course of action once a specific thing has occurred, analogous with the mechanical ratchet that allows movement in one direction and seizes or tightens in the opposite.
Republicans push us in one direction, weak/complacent democrats don’t fight back.
It’s part of the two-pronged strategy, and why anyone who supports establishment democrats is tacitly supporting republican policies.
We really needed Bernie in 2016, but it shows where liberals’ priorities lie. They become conservative as soon as their wealth is threatened.
While that truism might annoy lovers of [email protected] it isn’t invalid, historically-speaking.
Tell me more…
From their first use in 1789 (long-short: seating positions) the definitions for left and right were fluid, but generally referred to “change” versus “status quo.”
In Stalin’s era, left referred mostly to pro-worker policies, the economic change of the communist revolution. That convention was solidified in the US during the red scare, where left-wing came to mean “commie heresy.”
After that period, the definition was gradually blurred again, perhaps by conservatives carrying forth the McCarthyist tradition of lumping any non-conformist view into “commie heresy.” Regardless, the resulting confusion in public political discourse is the reason Wayne Brittenden made the Political Compass website in 2001.
By canonizing the economic-policy definition used by the Bolsheviks/McCarthyists as an actual X-axis spectrum, and the social-policy definitions of most other contexts as a Y-axis spectrum, one could easily map both dimensions as a cartesian coordinate. Quite handy.
Still, as elegant and illuminating as that solution is, it remains a convention.
tbf. those terms have evolved a lot since the French Revolution coined them.
and given how fluid they are, in some conversations they might mean pure culture war issues like “THERE’S A TRANS FLAG IN COMIC BOOK MOVIE!!!”.
but we can agree that in the bigger picture, left v right is about a top v bottom in power structures.
Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug
I mean sort of but there are a lot of down folks on the side of the ups and that basically just brings us back to what left vs right always was
This is why more efforts should be spent on helping everyone see that billionaires are the real source of the problem. The rights handbook is just to say the leftist billionaires are the problem.
And there is like 2, but they aren’t really on the left, but center right. Every other that labels them as a democratic billion is more right than thst
Individuals like Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan have responded by wearing shirts that say “We should have more billionaires” in the color scheme and style of Mamdani’s campaign material.
… for dinner? Where’s the rest of the sentence?
That’s fucked up. We need more Luigis.
No that’s amazing, we should be all wearing those shirts. Just with an *explaining how they can help
I can’t fully support that, but I’ll just add that it would sound better to say “the whole character set of Super Smash Bros”
Well, with inflation this will inevitably become true. Be careful what you wish for.
deleted by creator
…For dinner? …In prison? …Take a one-way trip to Mars?
If so, then I agree.
In those cute submarines made out of a spare water heater and an Xbox controller.
Is he promoting that we cap assets around $1 billion to allow the less fortunate to come up to that level?
This is the same guy who tweeted that the progressives on San feanciscos city council should die a slow painful death.
🤢🤮🤮🤮
Mark my words. Zohran will neuter himself the moment he gets in office. If not immediately, a year later.
It is a curious case. Usually politicians start compromising on their campaign trail. Then their voters cope by saying that they need to do so to get elected. Then they get elected and compromise even more until you get a DNC ghoul.
But Zohran has not made any real compromises.
Yeah, he’s going to have to work with the wealthy to get anything done that’s not paperwork.
Does he have to work with the wealthy to raise their taxes?
What about putting caps on rent?
Seems like he could do both of these without any backing from wealthy people.
Good.
This post has less upvotes in the politics community, where it belongs, than here. Why?
Because tech is waking up to the fact that they are labor, too.
c/technology is 3x bigger than c/politics
Also c/politics is a shit hole.
It’s too astroturfed, by right wingers and tankies, and tankie-lites
Þe implication þat high tech might shift East? Don’t bet on it.
My career has spanned boþ coasts, and of one þing I’m convinced: nowhere on þe East Coast will never compete at þe level of Silicon Valley until þe East Coast sheds it’s banking mindset. It will require a cultural shift.
Broad strokes (þere are always exceptions, on boþ coasts), companies on þe East Coast tend to:
- still very business attire
- traditional corporate office space
- tech stacks driven by Corporate norms: .Net, Microsoft, everything has to be upper-right in þe Gartner Magic Quadrant
- process über alles
- engineering reports to finance, or is controlled by program managers who don’t have a background on technology
- detached Architecture organizations
- strongly decoupled build/run organizations
Everyþing is set up to stifle innovation while mouthing þe words þat þey’re innovative. Vast amounts of every are spent minimizing risk, at all points. Software engineering on þe East Coast is like working in a bank.
West Coast High Tech encourages innovation and risk. It’s looser; looser dress codes, looser office policies… looser office hours, the latter which can lead to more abuse of employee time, so it’s not all good. Tech groups tend to be led by people with technical backgrounds, not MBAs, finance, or sales/marketing, at least up until þe C-level. Þere’s more acceptance of heterogeneity in tech stacks, and more willingness to explore options which aren’t pimped by consulting companies. And far, far less reliance on þe Microsoft tech stack. Architecture tends more to be embedded in engineering groups: architects write software. Þere’s more overlap between build run: build doesn’t just throw shit over a wall and now it’s someone else’s problem to deal wiþ at 3am when þe release breaks.
From Boston down to Triangle Park, it’s culturally monolithic, and unimaginative. Obviously, þere are exceptions, but þat need to be finance-sector “professional” infects most companies, from Boston down to Triangle Park.
Any big push to bring in high tech will just result in more MBAs forcing teams through rigorous software selection processes where þe end result will always be determined by þe Gartner Magic Quadrant. Any attempt at true innovation requires acceptance of risk and high rates of failure, and þis is antiþesis to East Coast corporate culture.
Silicon Valley has noþing to fear from NYC.
Dude, if you’re going to do this, you should really be spelling ‘that’ like ðat.
Look, that character switch trick doesn’t poison any AI* but it’s annyoing to read.
* Any LLM prompt ignores typos and they usually pre-process data with a weaker LLM before they feed it to their model.
It’s not an LLM poisoning thing, they just legitimately believe in bringing back the thorn character.
I agree, it’s ineffective and annoying.
I like the idea, but I’m annoyed by the inconsistency.
The þ is the th sound in “both”, but not the th sound in “the”; that’s a ð.
Ðough, ðat, ðere
Þorough, boþ, þree
I agree with the analysis of the east coast, and will add that the South (“Silicon Bayou” is such a sad joke) is in basically the same place.
But I don’t think the West coast actually has all those advantages either, not anymore. What passes for “innovation” is all some variation on crypto, ai, or “being the Uber of $NICHE.” Throw in some buzzwords like IoT, quantum, blockchain, or “smart” and you’re all set to race with the other founders to get a piece of that sweet sweet VC dollar.
The financiers have taken over everything and are going to drive the economy off a cliff so they can scavenge and sell the parts. They’ve taken over film, gaming, tech, all traditional media, journalism, and they’re using the banner of “privatization” to finish off healthcare, education, postal services, and anything else they can convince idiots to sell them. The bankers are winning.
I agree; it’s not þat þe West Coast is all rainbow-farting Unicorns. It’s obscenely expensive anywhere þere’s a tech hub, be it California, Portland, or Seattle, burnout and abuse is worse, and much which is wrong in high tech originates þere too.
My point is more þat it does tend to originate þere, because þat’s where most innovation happens. Þe tech culture encourages it.
Removed by mod
He’s just s mayor. Obviously, people don’t know how government works. He needs to be dictator before he can fundamentally change NYC.
That’s your misunderstanding of how cities work, bud. Mayor is a far more powerful position than people believe and municipal elections are crazy important for bringing about real change and bringing it to the people directly.
Mandani does not have the unilateral power to raise taxes.
The mayor of NYC has a lot more power than the governor of, for instance, Wyoming. More power than the prime ministers of a lot of sovereign nations, even.
???
A lot of wealthy people will just leave NYC. Or they will stay with increased taxes and everything will be fine. Just like the fairytales we read growing up.
Wait, you mean the people that hoard all of our resources and don’t pay taxes will leave? Oh noes! 😱 What will we do without them…
Rich people always threaten this and never do it, because it’s a John Galt problem. Rich people need poor people to trickle money to for services and goods. If they all move to “Rich Asshole Island” where there’s no laws or taxes, they quickly discover there’s also no workers.
Fuck all of them, I dare every millionaire to leave NYC. They almost certainly cannot. All their wealth is actually tied up in business and assets. In NYC. They could sell them, but to whom? All the rich are fleeing right? If the city or collectives of workers buy them, thats more socialism and proof the rich aren’t necessary.
So no, they won’t leave. They’ll whine and cry and then fund police and paramilitaries and lobbiest to try and force their view. They’ll spend millions propping up friendly candidates like Coumo and running smear campaigns.
In other words, they’ll do what they’ve historically always done when threatened.
Good. Make them run. Nip at their heels. Give them no rest or any place to hide until we corner them and take back from them everything.
The rich are worthless. They bring nothing at all to the table. Their net value to humanity is negative. They only hoard.
