Interesting, thanks for the info. I’ll have to google around about this when I have some free time today

What’s a DNS server?

You sure you dont want to put any more buzzwords and random accusations you can think of into your response? I’ll give you another go at it.

Baaaaaaaa

Gotcha, so you are in fact implying that anyone should be allowed to say whatever they want on other people’s digital property, and cloaking it in platitudes about censorship and 1984 rah rah. Trying to be eloquent in your response doesn’t hide the substance of what you’re saying.

Side note: I always love how conservatives, “nonpolitical” people, and “centrists” evoke 1984 imagery while also claiming that liberals are a vast and powerful, but also clumsy and weak, enemy. Almost like you use the same rhetoric on your enemies that the book you jackoff to had its sheep masses believe about their fake enemy. I’m sure that realization won’t have much impact on your programmed double-think, though.

To be clear, are you implying you think private entities should have to let you screech anything you want on their digital front lawn?

Musk isn’t gonna pay you for all these apologetics you’re making in this post

You think conspiracy theories in general sound reasonable, don’t you

Eh this is a much harder topic than you make it seem. For people like you and me, this may be the best approach to change our minds on things, but we also are the type of people to look at the facts around Musk and already come to the conclusion that he’s a far-right, duplicitous manchild.

The people that flock to him and others like him, however, are not the type to respond to just the facts. They’re invested emotionally into some aspect of what Musk is “selling” them. I don’t know what the correct response is to try and win these people over to reality, but calm, reasoned responses to the monkey throwing its shit around the interview room isn’t how you win over the people on the monkey’s side. They already know he throws his shit around and they like it

Hey cut Musk some slack, average people aren’t actually people

Not enough caps though

Well I’ve never heard of a religious person claiming AI could have a soul in the religious sense, and “soul” has other meanings than the religiously literal one, so yes?

“That’s "suppressing theft masquerading as art is awesome” you hear in that comment."

Emphasis mine. The context clues make the intended meaning pretty obvious

Oh buddy come on you can’t actually be misunderstanding how they used “horrible.” They’re not saying it’s bad quality they’re saying it’s bad morally

I’m curious what you mean by soul here, if you’re using it in a metaphorical sense or the religious sense

Ideally? Something like worker cooperatives or similar where profit and decision-making is more democratically spread through businesses.

Realistically? Probably capitalists by another name

That’s more a technicality vs practicality aspect. Even if we technically don’t have free will, the way our minds work make us feel like we have free will. The “accept it” aspect of the argument is appealing to us feeling like we make our own decisions, even if ultimately we didn’t actually make the choice to accept it.

Dude honestly sounds proud of being a NIMBY

Hey now that’s not all they are. A concerning number of them also don’t like statutory rape laws

Absolutely not, federating with Threads is the first step in the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish process that businesses have used in the past to kill things like the fediverse. This is a win for businesses that want to see the fediverse dead and buried