6 ms·

I read this once: There are two kinds of people: those who want to make the world a better place and those who want to make enough money to afford to not care.

by tagyro 3y ago

lnxg33k1 3y ago
Do you think that a guy that writes something like that, is going to understand/consider your message? 10/1 you're better off speaking to a chair
- birdman3131 3y ago
  Given that they including a winky face at the end I am fairly sure you missed the sarcasm inherent in the statement.
  - lnxg33k1 3y ago
    Oh that is very possible
replygirl 3y ago
those who believe the above are mutually exclusive, and those who develop social infrastructure
- tagyro 3y ago
  Do I understand correctly that you consider facebook "social infrastructure"? I really hope the fog will lift one day and you'll see the actual impact of facebook (and others), here's one example https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-part-one https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-pa...
  - xvector 3y ago
    Just because you don't like it does not make it "social infrastructure." The world runs on WhatsApp and billions use Facebook to keep in touch with their family and friends. Instagram is also a huge part of the social component of the internet. The bigger problem here is that the EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it, everything from WhatsApp to Maps to YouTube would switch to paid-only. A horde of startups would take up the banner, and as soon as they ran out of VC money, they too would need to switch to paid-only business models in order to adhere to GDPR. The EU does not understand how to run a successful tech industry. Edit: Non-targeted ads do not lead to break even. This law will simply lock most poor people out of the internet.
    - troupo 3y ago
      > EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. You can still serve ads in the EU. Literally nothing is stopping you from doing that. > If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it, everything from WhatsApp to Maps to YouTube would switch to paid-only. This is a lie. And GDPR should be interpreted exactly the way EU wants it to be interpreted because it's an EU law. > and as soon as they ran out of VC money, they too would need to switch to paid-only business models i Oh wow. "Companies should actually be profitable and not run on unlimited VC money" is such a radical concept. > The EU does not understand how to run a successful tech industry. Where "successful tech industry" is "hope there's unlimited VC money so that we can keep running our 'free' business while harvesting all available data on everyone because it's our God-given right"?
      - xvector 3y ago
        > You can still serve ads in the EU. Irrelevant. Normal ads are barely profitable. Your company will not be able to provide services to users if it had to depend on just normal ads. > This is a lie. And GDPR should be interpreted exactly the way EU wants it to be interpreted because it's an EU law. I don't really care about what the EU thinks is right. The EU does not understand what it takes to run a modern web service. It's sensible to fight these absurd rulings in court. You can consent to drugs or alcohol but can't consent to targeted ads. It's insane. > Oh wow. "Companies should actually be profitable and not run on unlimited VC money" is such a radical concept. That profit can be obtained either with targeted ads or locking poor people out of the internet. Those are your options. > Where "successful tech industry" is "hope there's unlimited VC money so that we can keep running our 'free' business while harvesting all available data on everyone because it's our God-given right"? How much VC money does Google use again? This is a blind law that pays no attention to the practicality of running services the world relies on.
  - replygirl 3y ago
    yes and no--i do believe facebook is social infrastructure, but i was not referring to facebook i already agree with you but if you ever come across me again on here please don't try to evangelize at me
throw_nbvc1234 3y ago
There's at least a 3rd group of people who want to virtue signal that they'll make the world a better place but put in zero effort.
firebat45 3y ago
There's shorter, handier terms for those two types of people: "naive", and "realistic", respectively.
- lnxg33k1 3y ago
  Those nice realistic people ready to bend over any master peeing on them and saying its gold, how nice would have been monarchies for those sweet realistic people Id call “naive” and “worthless for mankind” Who knows how many were calling the founding fathers naives

I read this once: There are two kinds of people: those who want to make the world a better place and those who want to make enough money to afford to not care.

by tagyro 3y ago

I read this once: There are two kinds of people: those who want to make the world a better place and those who want to make enough money to afford to not care.

lnxg33k1 3y ago

Do you think that a guy that writes something like that, is going to understand/consider your message? 10/1 you're better off speaking to a chair

birdman3131 3y ago
Given that they including a winky face at the end I am fairly sure you missed the sarcasm inherent in the statement.
- lnxg33k1 3y ago
  Oh that is very possible

replygirl 3y ago

those who believe the above are mutually exclusive, and those who develop social infrastructure

tagyro 3y ago
Do I understand correctly that you consider facebook "social infrastructure"? I really hope the fog will lift one day and you'll see the actual impact of facebook (and others), here's one example https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-part-one https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-pa...
- xvector 3y ago
  Just because you don't like it does not make it "social infrastructure." The world runs on WhatsApp and billions use Facebook to keep in touch with their family and friends. Instagram is also a huge part of the social component of the internet. The bigger problem here is that the EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it, everything from WhatsApp to Maps to YouTube would switch to paid-only. A horde of startups would take up the banner, and as soon as they ran out of VC money, they too would need to switch to paid-only business models in order to adhere to GDPR. The EU does not understand how to run a successful tech industry. Edit: Non-targeted ads do not lead to break even. This law will simply lock most poor people out of the internet.
  - troupo 3y ago
    > EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. You can still serve ads in the EU. Literally nothing is stopping you from doing that. > If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it, everything from WhatsApp to Maps to YouTube would switch to paid-only. This is a lie. And GDPR should be interpreted exactly the way EU wants it to be interpreted because it's an EU law. > and as soon as they ran out of VC money, they too would need to switch to paid-only business models i Oh wow. "Companies should actually be profitable and not run on unlimited VC money" is such a radical concept. > The EU does not understand how to run a successful tech industry. Where "successful tech industry" is "hope there's unlimited VC money so that we can keep running our 'free' business while harvesting all available data on everyone because it's our God-given right"?
    - xvector 3y ago
      > You can still serve ads in the EU. Irrelevant. Normal ads are barely profitable. Your company will not be able to provide services to users if it had to depend on just normal ads. > This is a lie. And GDPR should be interpreted exactly the way EU wants it to be interpreted because it's an EU law. I don't really care about what the EU thinks is right. The EU does not understand what it takes to run a modern web service. It's sensible to fight these absurd rulings in court. You can consent to drugs or alcohol but can't consent to targeted ads. It's insane. > Oh wow. "Companies should actually be profitable and not run on unlimited VC money" is such a radical concept. That profit can be obtained either with targeted ads or locking poor people out of the internet. Those are your options. > Where "successful tech industry" is "hope there's unlimited VC money so that we can keep running our 'free' business while harvesting all available data on everyone because it's our God-given right"? How much VC money does Google use again? This is a blind law that pays no attention to the practicality of running services the world relies on.
- replygirl 3y ago
  yes and no--i do believe facebook is social infrastructure, but i was not referring to facebook i already agree with you but if you ever come across me again on here please don't try to evangelize at me

throw_nbvc1234 3y ago

There's at least a 3rd group of people who want to virtue signal that they'll make the world a better place but put in zero effort.

firebat45 3y ago

There's shorter, handier terms for those two types of people: "naive", and "realistic", respectively.

lnxg33k1 3y ago
Those nice realistic people ready to bend over any master peeing on them and saying its gold, how nice would have been monarchies for those sweet realistic people Id call “naive” and “worthless for mankind” Who knows how many were calling the founding fathers naives