• 1 Post
  • 48 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle

  • So you will believe a rumour based on nothing

    Says Tesla. You’re a fool if someone saying “nuh uh!” is good enough for you. Especially when its the reputation of the WSJ vs. the reputation of Tesla.

    won’t believe the board of directors denying said rumour unless they sue?

    Tell me you know absolute dick-all about corporations, without telling me you know dick-all about corporations.

    I’ll give you a hint: what do you think would happen to the stock price of literally any company if the board confirmed they were ousting the CEO before the CEO was out? My dude, your native Australia has a better chance of eliminating every single venomous critter on that island than any corporate board admitting that. And that goes double for the single most overvalued stock on the planet, whose price is driven solely by the hype man’s promises.

    So yes. If and when Tesla sues the WSJ, and wins that case, then I’ll believe they were right. Until then, I’m going to treat them like the lying Nazi-enabling shit car company they are.





  • This is exactly how YouTube’s DMCA takedown system works, and how media companies have been abusing it since it’s inception. Someone claims copyright on your video, and Google immediately takes it down. You then can contest the claim and Youtube will put it back up. But the claimant can contest your contest, and Google will then tell you that you can’t have it up and have to settle in court with the claimant. Oh, and you get a strike to boot.

    The whole process is automated, because there’s so much content now it’s impractical for every single takedown request to be addressed by a human. And because there is no punishment for bad-faith takedown requests, there is no incentive for the claimants to ensure their IP is really being infringed.










  • Billiam@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Well this is just flat out wrong.

    The fact that people started appending “Reddit” to their search terms to find answers to what they wanted to know would probably be a gigantic indicator that Google’s results without it were less than helpful.

    A useful search engine returns the most relevant result the user wants as fast as possible. An advertising company wants its users to look at as many ads as they can for as long as they’ll tolerate them. Thus it’s apparent the goals of Google (the search engine) are diametrically opposed to the goals of Alphabet (the advertising company).

    So yes, it’s in the best interest of Google’s bottom line to figure out how many ads they can show you (read: before you stop using Google altogether) until they show what might be relevant to you.



  • Billiam@lemmy.worldtoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    It’s nepotism if the person doing the hiring/appointing employs their relatives. If your husband didn’t hire you, it’s not nepotism.

    Also to note, nepotism has a connotation of being bad but there’s nothing inherent in the definition that says it is. If your husband hires you, it’s possible you might be the most qualified person for the job. However, there’s always going to be the appearance of favoritism or cronyism, which is why it’s ethically frowned-on.