• vd1n@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t know how I feel about that. They both deserve to be treated like cartel criminals. NOTHING LESS.

    You gotta realize criminals and street life is the same as the mainstream. Please trust me.

    • ColonelSanders@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed. Rationalizing one as being the ‘lesser evil’ is basically just shifting the Overton window. Both are evil. Both deserve to lose. If they can make each other lose that would be ideal but if only one wins, we all still lose.

      • insomniac@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s odd to me people think Elon is more evil anyway. He’s definitely louder and stupider but way less responsible for tearing apart the fabric of our society. And some of his projects have been a net positive.

        They should both lose to death but if we’re gonna make the comparison, Zuckbot is hands down more evil.

        That being said, it will still be hilarious if zucc beats the shit out of Elongated Muskrat.

        • BurningnnTree@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed, I may have more of a gut level disdain for Elon, but Zucc is clearly way worse because of the way Facebook’s algorithms have harmed society.

        • vd1n@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          True true! Zuck was a catalyst for social media, and Elon for abused tech/science. I knew Elon was a joke the minute he talked about putting a car in space, just to test something, but back then I just got hated by reddit. It sucks that the world and space programs didn’t come after him for that.

    • graphite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You gotta realize criminals and street life is the same as the mainstream. Please trust me.

      lmfao

  • Rhabuko@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck Elmo but I just don’t want Meta to replace Twitter’s social media niche. I would prefer if Mastodon would be the next “Twitter” but at this point I would be okay with Bluesky too. The Meta cancer is already big enough and has too much influence.

    • MisterMoo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d rather have a moderated site replace Twitter at this point, even if it’s run by Meta. My first choice is for an intuitive non-Meta alternative to rise to prominence, ideally in the fediverse, but I think Mastodon had its chance and its unintuitive nature was too challenging for a critical mass of lay people. It needs to be: sign up, start posting. Instead it’s: sign up, choose your server. Huh? You’re already losing people.

      All this has already been covered but it has to be simple and intuitive and that’s what Threads is offering and Mastodon isn’t.

      • HappySerf@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly this. Anything too challenging for a third-, grader is done before it starts in terms of mass acceptance.

    • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think everyone in the ActivityPub hopes Mastodon is the next Twitter but other than that, it’s a tie between the all three. I think Bluesky has the best chance since it has the cleanest plate but it’ll absolute turn into a shit hole like the rest.

      Cohost would be cool.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do you not know what analogies or metaphors are? Like, you do know that the person you replied to wasn’t comparing either of these men to Hitler or Himmler, right?

        • graphite@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The usage of the analogy by definition implies a comparison of some kind.

          Otherwise, wny use it?

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            To exaggerate and make a point? To rile people up and ruffle some feathers? The comparison isn’t between the two of them and the two Nazis, the comparison is between the two of them.

            • graphite@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              No no no, those are valid, sure, but they wouldn’t be possible without that initial comparison.

              The comparison isn’t between the two of them and the two Nazis, the comparison is between the two of them.

              There’s the implication that they’re both “evil” or “bad figures”, which is the entire point. The analogy itself wouldn’t be that great otherwise

              • prole@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Yeah, the implication is that their bad or evil, but I don’t really see it as comparing them to the Nazis. They just exaggerated for effect and used the most extreme example of “evil” they could think of to make a point.

                At least that how it seemed to me.

  • QubaXR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trading one asshole billionaire for another is a losing game. The only losers are users of these services.

    It’s like two giant Mecha robots fighting while a crowd of fans of one or the other are cheering on the ground and being squished.

  • inactive@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This sentiment is so fucking wrong. Please, for god’s sake, please understand that Zuckerberg is NOT the lesser of two evils here. Meta facilitated a genocide by artificially promoting hateful content to boost engagement, quietly and without obvious consent performed behavior experiments on its users, and so much fucking more that the two aforementioned points barely even scratch the surface.

    You people are trading being punched in the face with being beaten senselessly with a baseball bat.

    • k110111@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Add cambridge analytica as well, it used to be all over the news but now everyone already forgot about it

    • mrnomoniker@lemmy.studio
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why not both? Can’t we hope enough stuff leaves twitter to hasten it’s demise and that threads implodes after a short period of over inflated reports of success?

  • x4740N@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In the fight against one evil should we really join another evil to do that

  • Uniquitous@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    So here’s what we do: we let Threads kill Twitter. Then, when Twitter is dead, we kill Threads.

  • Little1Lost@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    but why use threads when you could use mastodon? When threads enters the fediverse it is like the ad free version of threads (from a threads user perspective)

  • LostCause@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I‘d enjoy it if they both lose money/attention and more of it went to the devs and admins of all these instances I like. Unlikely, but I can dream.

  • krimsonbun@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want them both to lose. Twitter dying would be in some ways, a victory for the people. But giving zucky more control over people’s lives is a horrible idea, especially when you take into account meta’s past. But we don’t have much say in what happens there, so we gotta learn to fight back.

    Threads is banned in Europe which will probably leave a lot of people sad, if you ask me that’s the perfect opportunity to advertise mastodon and other fediverse projects to your friends, family, etc. Talk about it on bigger platforms if you still have an account on them, engage with posts and videos about the fediverse and how to use it so we can get them into the algorithm. Every little bit helps, we can do this.

    • I want them both to lose.

      I read this one sentence and immediately imagined a Celebrity Deathmatch type scenario where Mark and Elon and beating the shit out of each other, but in the end Jeff Bezos shows up and just drops like Scrooge McDuck’s entire vault on the other two billionaires and claims the victory.