nameless_prole

You got paid, because it’s required by law that you do.

That’s not true. Maybe it varies from state to state, I dunno, but I live in an otherwise very blue state, and there’s no statute on the books saying that a private employer must pay for time missed for jury duty.

They are required to allow you to go if you’re summoned, but beyond that, it’s their choice. Obviously, most (if not all) choose not to.

And who are they going to have take over mod responsibilities (for free) in all of these communities at once? This is why mods need to call their bluff and force them to try to replace them.

Nah, horseshoe theory is bullshit. Militant far left, and militant far right are shitty for very different reasons.

I don’t know, I like Sotomayor. And Brown-Jackson seems alright. And I really don’t have much opinion on Kagan aside from the fact that I usually agree with her rulings. As for Conservatives, I disagree with all of them almost always, but Gorsuch at least seems to care about consistency, and I think his views on Native affairs is admirable.

Tankies make us all look bad

Was bound to happen when average people started creating cults of personality around billionaires.

This is super naive. Facebook/Meta has zero interest in “playing nice” with competitors in any field. Their intentions with the fediverse are not pure, and you’re a fool if you think otherwise.

This is capitalism, and this is one of the most profitable corporations that has ever existed on the planet. A corporation who has made those profits almost entirely from the private data of its users (and even some users that aren’t subscribed to their service. That’s how much data they have).

They don’t “work together” with competitors “for the good of everyone.” That’s a pipe dream.

Unfortunately, she’s dead which means she will never even have the capacity to understand what her decision meant.

I think it would be incredibly naive and foolish to believe Meta has any kind of pure motives for this.

One of the biggest corporations in the world reaching out to its competitor to try to get them to talk “off the record” about “confidential details”… Sounds like a pretty blatant scheme to get them to reveal confidential details about their competitor’s product.

Or maybe Meta has broken with decades of its own conduct, and several centuries of capitalism, in order to reach out in good faith to their competitor. LOL.

I don’t really understand reddit’s angle here… Why would they provide zero cost API access to an app, as long as the developer of the app isn’t making a profit? Are they trying to act like that was the issue they had with these third party apps? That they e profitable?

How does it make sense for them to allow an app for that reason?