this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
372 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

59596 readers
3235 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A federal rule banning fake online reviews is now in effect

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Businesses that knowingly buy fake reviews, procure them from company insiders or disseminate fake reviews will be penalized

Penalized how much? How big are the fines?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

They might even use a second finger!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

For a monthly retainer of only 100 millionions I will review and certify each review.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago

Now enforce it?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

Anti-consumer corporations right now:

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Oh look, Lina Khan bringing the heat again. My god, she's like a bureaucratic superhero. Lemmy loves bagging on capitalism, but capitalism ain't the problem. The problem is our spineless, bought and paid for government. Action like this can turn us around, wrest power away from the monopolists.

Losing her to a Trump administration is yet another horror we may face.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

capitalists have paid harris to kick her out if she wins, so lina khan will be gone soon regardless of who wins.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

capitalism may not be "the problem" but it is a problem.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

People who vote for Trump like to blame democrats and woke people, but what they really and truly hate is capitalism. They just can't see that what makes them unhappy is the natural effect of a fully capitalistic society.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Well, I suppose you have a genius economic system where the haves don't take advantage of the have nots. Tell us all about it!

(FFS, do they not teach history in schools any more?!)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

There are other alternatives to capitalism besides Authoritarian Marxist-Leninist states. An example would be Georgist economic democracy. Some policies in such an economy:

  1. All firms would be legally mandated to protect the inalienable right to worker democracy by structuring as democratic worker coops. There would thus be no haves appropriating 100% of the fruits of the have nots' labor

  2. 100% land tax and carbon tax

  3. PCO for all capital

  4. Guaranteed minimum income

@technology

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Communism envisions a society where there are no haves and have nots (classless) and socialism is put forward as the economic system that will get us there eventually. There are criticisms to be made about the method but the vision is good.

Capitalism does what you're doing here, snarkily talk down to anyone who dares suggest such a society might be possible and is worth working towards, and puts forward instead that there must be haves taking advantage of have nots for society to function and that no other way is possible.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Such a society is not possible because we're human beings, warts and all. FFS, teach monkeys how to use money and they invent prostitution.

There will always be people who look to dominate others for personal gain. Also, the "tragedy of the commons" is well known fact of life. If an economic system isn't taking human behavior into account, it's useless, hippie bullshit.

That's why capitalism worked so well for so long. Now that we're into the later stages, it's up to government to reign it in. When I was a kid in the 70s and 80s, a bad/immoral reputation could easily tank a company. Now no one gives a shit, keeps buying and buying. Fine. Time for the government to step up, but our representatives are bought and paid for by the very organizations they should be regulating. And that last is going to be a feature of any economic system.

Maybe it's already too late? Seems like it, but then I see people like Lina Kahn taking on Wall Street and Silicon Valley, and I have hope.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Put those monkeys underwater and you might conclude that drowning is in their nature. I know of the studies you're referencing regarding monkeys being taught to use money and I'm aware that they were done with monkeys in captivity. In the same vein, the debunked study about "alpha" wolves was done on wolves in captivity and observations of wolves in their natural environment countered the study's findings. Our actions are a result of the context and material conditions that we are in.

People dominate others for personal gain because they live in a system that rewards them for doing so. Place those people in a system that rewards them for helping others and the very same selfish impulse will make them saints. The "tragedy of the commons" is enlightenment era defeatist bullshit. The commons existed and were managed by people for thousands of years before capitalists enclosed them and dared to claim that it was the inevitable result of human nature.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Genuine question, what happens when the populace loses motivation to contribute? Such as the “lie down” movement (yes I understand China is not the best example).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

These kinds of movements are a consequence of over-exploitation. The "lie down" movement - also "let it rot" - is similar to the "quiet quitting" movement in the US. People will not be motivated to contribute when they are struggling and do not see any benefit to trying harder. If these people were fairly compensated for their labor and had greater autonomy over how to contribute they would not lose motivation. Alienation from the result of their labor is also a huge contributor; feeling rewarded for your work can be as simple as seeing the result (a teacher seeing their students find their passions, for example).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There's far more to motivation and more pay can actually be detrimental depending on the sort of work. Sounds stupidly counter-intuitive doesn't it? Take a look, this really opened my eyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

That video really hit home for me. I looked back over all the varied jobs I had and the places I was most happy gave me what the video talks about. My last job was double the pay and benefits of the one before and I haven't been less motivated.

Seriously, give it 10-minutes. At one point I was thinking, "Damn! He's talking about Linux!"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I guess my point is what happens when they genuinely just want to exist for a year and nothing else. I get this is not a realistic question. Just curious of the outcome there

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

If that's something they need then that's something they should get. No one will be happy doing nothing forever, in that year they will likely find something that makes them happy, especially if opportunities are made available to them.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Capitalism is why our govt is bought and paid for. They are inextricable.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Corruption will exist in every government, regardless of economic system. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Try not to fixate on the corruption- that's essentially a smokescreen; the whole point is that the system itself is designed to concentrate wealth.

Since we're bandying about well-trodden quotes, how about this one:

"A bad system will beat a good person every time." -E. Deming

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well what's an ethical alternative? Central planning?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

How about the opposite? A decentralized system, avoiding concentrating power in any one place, and focusing on building platforms for coordination to act on larger scales

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

As a Lemmy user I'm certainly intrigued with the buzzwords you've thrown out, but there doesn't seem to be an actual system anywhere in there.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

Anyone believes in it?

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 month ago

Sounds like this is primarily to punish companies for purchasing fake reviews. I'm a fan

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How is this even enforced tho?

I appreciate the sentiment though. Recruiters add so much girft into the process... All to wear done the wagie

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

They'll likely rely on reports from the public. I don't imagine this is intended to go after individuals, but rather,, companies that buy fake reviews by the hundreds.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Probably via some attempt to force everyone to verify who they are online by providing their identification documents. It will probably be managed by some company specialized in handling that data, and of course willing to share the data with police and other gov organizations. Data that will be used to track citizens.

Just another endless battle to keep net neutrality alive.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Is this retroactive because I really don't want to have to delete my review of the cyber truck where I called it a used toilet paper recepticle on wheels. I admittedly do not have a head trauma history, so I did not actually buy a cyber truck.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, it can be used as a toilet paper receptacle. Just because you didn't buy it, doesn't mean you can't review it. People review and return stuff all the time. I do not see anything wrong here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's not actually possible to return one of these cyber trucks due to rules involving sale after purchase.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

There is however over 200 Cybertrucks for rent on Turo. I guess all the owners got bored of them already.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But your review was still accurate. I wipe my ass on every cybertruck I see because of it. A++++ highly recommend!

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

With all the ugly angles that sounds dangerous

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

I live life on the edge(s)