I want to second this, and go further with a hot take: I liked Graber’s answers a lot.

I think skepticism of her and the entire artifice of VC and big tech is totally warranted. But a lot of people in this section seem to basically say, ‘no matter what she says I don’t trust her and I’m certain that BlueSky will be another bad actor.’ And I think that’s an overly simplistic take.

It’s true that there are no trustworthy CEOs. You shouldn’t trust Graber. It will always be a mistake to pin hopes of good management of a platform on the magnanimity of any business leader. However if we want to see a new era of decentralization but are honest about the fact that most users are more likely to join big, corporate-styled platforms (in the short term, at least) then the ideal platform is one that attempts to build their business model around portability.

It’s totally true that BlueSky isn’t there yet. But they’re basically building a set of escape hatches for users. Cory Doctorow talks a lot about how restricting users from leaving a platform is a key requirement to enshitify. So if BlueSky uses a protocol that at least has the potential for this, they’re creating an incentive structure that really does serve a purpose. They may later on try to reverse course. But at least for now, they’re doing the thing that gives users and the third party developers the best chance of escape if things go bad. And that is exactly what I want to see from a big tech platform.

I thought it was built on activity pub.

I’m gonna go over to my Mastodon account and try to reply to you. One sec.

Overall, I like the options today a lot better than what we had 10 or even 5 years ago.

I am glad that both Mastodon and Blue Sky exist. I would like both to be successful.

Yeah, seems like a pretty big oversight for the author… [Checks byline]… no author credited.

Great. Very real. Much news.

Yeah, I came to say this same thing.

I think this post is a cope.

You might be 100% right. But that wouldn’t change the fact that you’re focusing on the individual in a story about trends, and I think you’re doing so because doing so is a way to avoid engaging with the larger point of the article.

Tech work isn’t safe. No work is really safe these days. It doesn’t even matter if AI can do your job well. It is just a facet of a project to devalue labor and disempower laborers. And that project is going really well! No matter how good you are at your job, none of us can “merit” our way out of that project.

I’m great at my job, and my job is very AI proof. But that doesn’t protect me from the fact that my company is looking for ways to gigify the work and hire contract workers from among highly paid laid off scientists and engineers to take over little easy parts of my job. They’ll concentrate the hard parts, of my job and yours, and reorganize it until it’s as modular as possible, and raise our workloads without increasing our pay until they can make it hard enough to say we’re not doing it fast enough.

No chatbot will replace me in the next 10 years. But my company doesn’t need them to in order to limit my bargaining power! They’re fostering an ecosystem of abundant cheap, fungible atomized workers so they will never have to bid for your labor or worry about you being irreplaceable.

All of us need to get wise to the con. We need universal incomes, universal services, universal healthcare, universal housing. We need a guaranteed safety net that is high enough that everyone has the ability to turn down bad jobs. Even the people you think suck at their jobs.

You cannot escape this by dismissing any laid off worker as too slow to keep up. Because this is a team event. And the bosses are on the other team.

I don’t think that’s true.

I don’t think livestreaming your whole life is healthy or desirable, but I don’t see finding friends who are cool with it to be an obstacle. There are plenty of other Twitch streamers at the very least who are down with this stuff. And she lives in Austin. Why not have a couple of buddies to go on jogs with or play basket ball or cook with? I just don’t see how that would be hard to do.

I don’t feel like this article answered my questions well.

I’m curious if she was interviewed over text or of she streamed it.

Also, why is she so alone? Can’t you have any friends over for board games while doing this?

It sounds genuinely fucked up.

'Your honor, we urge you to allow this company to continue breaking the law because our business is insolvent without the revenue we earn from crimes.’

I like Firefox, but if enforcing antitrust collapses Mozilla than so be it. How long has this car been going on? Have they not established any plans for what they’d do if this happened? They derive 75% of their whole company revenue from one source that was likely to be found illegal? They really thought that was a good idea? That’s a hell of a business model. It’s not a judge’s job to save them from that.

This article doesn’t really live up to the headline.

I read to see why it’s worse than it seems, and the reason given is that Tesla isn’t competitive or popular.

That’s not really worse than it appears. That’s just as bad as it appears.

Which is really bad. But there’s no second shoe in the article. I want my two minutes back.

I don’t really know much about him, and I can’t dispute your personal gut feeling. But I’m not familiar with anything that gives me this feeling.

For what it’s worth, I think in general that if you say, “I just don’t quite trust <name>. I didn’t know why, but they creep me out,” about pretty much anyone in public political life you can probably find a basis for that over a long enough time scale.

He is a former Marxist?? I find that bewildering, hilarious, and doubtful.

I think it’s great when people have open enough minds to radically rethink their beliefs, but I hope I’m never so brainrotted as to somehow strawman my own former beliefs.

This meme doesn’t work because a conservative literally bought me a copy of that book and it’s infantile.

This book is titled “Basic Economics” because Sowel is a troll, and the economics in his book are largely correct but incomplete to the point of misinforming people. This is an incredibly “conservative” book through-and-through.

This is essentially what I was going to say (though more poetic).

I’m of two minds. I admit that i cringe a bit that he would even call this “good trouble”. John Lewis’ “good trouble” was nearly getting beaten to death. How Booker can apply such a label to an act of protest that didn’t even meaningfully delay any noteworthy business is frankly amazing to me.

But also, he did fucking do something. He specifically articulated that we should all be alarmed, and he declared that he intends to not cooperate with or normalize what is happening. Low bar? Yes. But we all have to start somewhere.

I actually like Cory Booker. He was my third or fourth pick among the 20-something candidates that ran in 2020.

I’ll say this: this act is not enough to convince me that elected Democrats are going to do anything meaningful in the next two years. But the absence of it would’ve made me far less likely to expect it. Good for him.

Fuckkk this is horrible.

This is really cool. I love how things like Wikipedia just show how weirdly f’d up our whole society is by doing something without extracting maximum compensation and breaking systems.

This is kind of weird timing, because “No Other Land” just won an Oscar.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/09/no-other-land-film-shared-palestine-solidarity

No offense, but that’s conspiracy nonsense.

There are plenty of real conspiracies. You don’t need to l look for the goofball ones.

Honest take? A lot in the short term, but probably quite little beyond that. Maybe Harris won and a Nazi would win after that, or Vance would win on a similarly radical platform. But this won’t pass until we identify a replacement. But there’s no simply avoiding what we’re going through.

Dude…

As the expression goes, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Sure, he’s a morally bankrupt wildly corrupt autocrat. But sometimes his enemies happen to be people I hate too.

Why is he doing this? I can’t say for certain, but my guess is that the military-industrial complex is on the wrong side of his kleptocracy. If they’d given the right bribes and flattery I’m sure he’d be saying that we gotta build more nukes, but apparently the CEOs of Raytheon et. al. didn’t back the right horse. Plus, Trump likes the dictator club. He’d rather he, Putin, and Xi spent those dollars on presidential yaughts and focused on locking up dissidents than having an arms race among buddies.

Even still… fundamentally he’s fuckin right. It makes no sense for us to give billions and billions and billions to these companies so that we have the capacity to exterminate the human race a fifth time or something. Killing our whole species once is fuckin stupid to begin with, but planning on doing it multiple times is just advanced levels of stupid, and it’s dangerous as hell to incentivize other countries to get into this red-queen race.

Sure, his reasons are almost certainly evil as hell. But wherever they are… he’s right that we should cut our military budget in half and negotiate disarmament.