lemonaz

IMO it’s not that blue check equals credibility, but rather it equals that you are who you say you are. This is a good thing particularly when it comes to public figures/officials — not for their sake, mind you, but for the sake of other people who may see a tweet from them. If the checkmark is there, then it’s them. If not, then it’s an impersonator. Right now it’s difficult to tell.

Tl;dr: it doesn’t make what they say real, it just makes them real.

I didn’t prove your point, you’re just being inconsistent: you started by saying this “mafia” of yours is supposedly imposing a trend, but now they’re just following the trend — they can’t do both. If they’re just mimicking support, then they’re just following… so who’s leading? Who’s the boss of the “LGBT mafia”? That was my original question: who’s incentivizing all the wokeness?

As for “forcing behaviors”, they’re not forcing anything more than some KPIs that can be skirted by hiring a consultant to do some bullshit sensitivity training. Just take a look at how shallow the environment pledges have been: all that posturing and nobody’s actually hitting their targets, not companies and not even countries (because it’s a neoliberalism problem). They talk a big game then bury the lede when it’s time to show results. They do the same crap with all progressive issues, and their hypocrisy is delegitimizing the actual movements, because people associate the real issues with this shallow pretend support, and come to believe it’s all fake. We’re so cooked, man.

Ah yes, the CEO of Blackrock is definitely an ally to LGBT people (head of their “mafia” even, according to you) and not just cynically pandering to whichever way the wind is blowing for exactly the amount of time it’s beneficial to him and not a second more.

Just so you know, no progressive likes these evil companies or considers them or their CEOs allies. Their DEI initiatives are as fake as their environmental ones, it’s just virtue signaling. They don’t actually do anything for LGBT people — or any people for that matter, because believe it or not, real DEI includes straight white guys too! — they just adapt their marketing and product offerings to growing progressive sentiment. But the second the culture shifts, so does their “very serious commitment” to ESG/DEI/whatever.

And don’t get me started how the rainbow marketing is non-existant in countries without widespread acceptance of LGBT people, which you’d think would be a crucial piece of their activity if their goal was actually to spread an ideology, right? (By contrast, think how MAGA-like movements exist in even the most progressive countries, and they push on regardless.) But this supposed “LGBT mafia” doesn’t push at all, they’re reactive to the environment and they shift gears the second it becomes a perceived liability: Musk, Zuckerberg, all of Big Tech and other supposed global wokeness spreaders, they all pivoted away from performative progressivism the second they realized it wouldn’t harm their profits.

So there’s your LGBT mafia chief. Got any more?

New shiny trend like…education? Or more broadly: workers’ rights, unions, due process, civil rights?

So punished and oppressed.

Are the LGBT mafia in the room with us right now? Who is their leader?

The fact that she’s a lady might actually save her from that hellish place because they apparently refuse to take women and turn them back. But of course there are other hellish places.

While they do play a part, race and gender are not the deciding factors here. This is clearly about class — and more recently, allegiance.

You’re correct but the “He has a plan” one is from Money & Macro, a leftist (Marxist-friendly) economics channel. He’s trying to explain the broader strategy behind the tariffs, which (from skimming the video) seems similar to a theory Yanis Varoufakis had as well. I think it’s much simpler than that though… I think they’re just a sloppy way to appear tough on the world stage while crashing the economy so the ultrarich can pick up the pieces, but that’s just me.

Anyway you’re correct about the rest I think. And tbh even one pipeline video in the top recommended is too many.

And Kick is a cesspool gambling-friendly “free speech” Twitch alternative.

For sure. It was more of a “yes, and” than disagreement. Profit is such a vile incentive, literally why we can’t have nice things.

I’m more concerned about “anti-rainbow” capitalism. Like what’s happening right now where instead of being performatively progressive they become performatively reactionary. (Well, I suppose that’s just reactionary.)

Basically what I mean is I want rainbow capitalism to exist, but in a very specific way: I want rainbow capitalism to be the bare minimum a company has to implement if they want to exist. I want the social circumstances to force them to at least pretend to be on the right side of history.

Honestly, the real problem in rainbow capitalism is the capitalism part.

Just don’t make a video criticizing the nazi using snippets of the nazi’s videos, because that’s when you risk getting taken down for hate speech.

Smaller channels have this happen to them on a regular basis when they criticize bigger channels like, say, Matt Walsh. In that case, it’s because YT likes the bigger channel better for giving more ad revenue, but they still know that it’s hate speech so they apply their own rule selectively… on people criticizing the hate speech. They only ban chuds after they become irrelevant, and that’s only to save face — for example, when they banned Stefan Molyneux he was hardly popular anymore, so there was no financial loss in banning him, and they could score brownie points about how progressive they are.

Yeah, I know there was a story in that Spectator magazine. I’m still not sold. Dittman said way too many stupid things that point to him being Elon.

I suppose it wouldn’t matter at that point? I’m not sure what you mean exactly. There’s a lot of instability in America right now as it tries to become fully fascist, and I think the world (to any Americans reading this — this includes you too!) has to decide whether they’re fine with it or not, which will in turn affect its success in becoming fully fascist. Anything done to make it harder for the transformation to complete could turn the tide, since they’re more vulnerable while things are in motion. Once it’s done and that becomes the norm, it’s going to become much more difficult.

I get where you’re coming from. I’m no fan of China and they’re definitely fascist in my book, but if I had to choose between China and this America, then definitely China. The reason being that a successful fascist America will add even more suffering to the world than there already is. Still, I would prefer an option from a democratic country succeeds — although if we’re talking strictly local use of Chinese (or even US) tech, I don’t really see how that helps the country itself. To the high seas, as they say.

The more subscriptions Mistral get, the more they’re able to compete with the US offerings.

That’s true. I’m still on free. How much for the Pro?

Oh yeah, local is a different story. I’d probably look into something like what you mentioned if I had the hardware, but atm I’m more interested in finding 1-1 alternatives to these tech behemoths, ones that anyone can use with the same level of convenience.

Le Chat by Mistral is a France-based (and EU abiding) alternative to ChatGPT. Works fine for me so far.

Yup, and always will be, because the antiwoke worldview is so delusional that it calls empirical reality “woke”. Thus, an AI that responds truthfully will always be woke.

Nobody’s saying otherwise.